Cost-effectiveness of electroconvulsive therapy compared to repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment-resistant severe depression: a decision model

Cost-Effectiveness of rTMS as a Next Step in Antidepressant Non-Responders: A Randomized Comparison With Current Antidepressant Treatment Approaches

BACKGROUND

Although repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is an effective and commonly used treatment option for treatment-resistant depression, its cost-effectiveness remains much less studied. In particular, the comparative cost-effectiveness of rTMS and other treatment options, such as antidepressant medication, has not been investigated.

METHODS

An economic evaluation with 12 months follow-up was conducted in the Dutch care setting as part of a pragmatic multicenter randomized controlled trial, in which patients with treatment-resistant depression were randomized to treatment with rTMS or treatment with the next pharmacological step according to the treatment algorithm. Missing data were handled with single imputations using predictive mean matching (PMM) nested in bootstraps. Incremental cost-effectiveness and cost-utility ratios (ICERs/ICURs) were calculated, as well as cost-effectiveness planes and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEACs).

RESULTS

Higher QALYs, response, and remission rates were found for lower costs when comparing the rTMS group to the medication group. After 12 months, QALYs were 0.618 in the rTMS group and 0.545 in the medication group. The response was 27.1% and 24.4% and remission was 25.0% and 17.1%, respectively. Incremental costs for rTMS were -€2.280, resulting in a dominant ICUR for QALYs and ICER for response and remission.

CONCLUSION

rTMS appears to be a cost-effective treatment option for treatment-resistant depression when compared to the next pharmacological treatment step. The results support the implementation of rTMS as a step in the treatment algorithm for depression.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial is registered within the Netherlands Trial Register (code: NL7628, date: March 29, 2019).

Cost-utility analysis of adjunct repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for treatment resistant bipolar depression

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) as an adjunct to standard care from an Australian health sector perspective, compared to standard care alone for adults with treatment-resistant bipolar depression (TRBD).

METHODS

An economic model was developed to estimate the cost per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted and quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for rTMS added to standard care compared to standard care alone, for adults with TRBD. The model simulated the time in three health states (mania, depression, residual) over one year. Response to rTMS was sourced from a meta-analysis, converted to a relative risk and used to modify the time in the depressed state. Uncertainty and sensitivity tested the robustness of results.

RESULTS

Base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were $72,299 per DALY averted (95 % Uncertainty Interval (UI): $60,915 to $86,668) and $46,623 per QALY gained (95 % UI: $39,676 - $55,161). At a willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of $96,000 per DALY averted, the base-case had a 100 % probability of being marginally cost-effective. At a WTP threshold of $64,000 per QALY gained, the base-case had a 100 % probability of being cost-effective. Sensitivity analyses decreasing the number of sessions provided, increasing the disability weight or the time spent in the depression state for standard care improved the ICERs for rTMS.

CONCLUSIONS

Dependent on the outcome measure utilised and assumptions, rTMS would be considered a very cost-effective or marginally cost-effective adjunct to standard care for TRBD compared to standard care alone.

Patient-Informed Value Elements in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Major Depressive Disorder Treatment: A Literature Review and Synthesis

OBJECTIVES

Prior work identified 6 key value elements (attributes of treatment and desired outcomes) for individuals living with major depressive disorder (MDD) in managing their condition: mode of treatment, time to treatment helpfulness, MDD relief, quality of work, interaction with others, and affordability. The objective of our study was to identify whether previous cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) for MDD treatment addressed any of these value elements. A secondary objective was to identify whether any study engaged patients, family members, and caregivers in the model development process.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature review to identify published model-based CEAs. We compared the elements of the published studies with the MDD patient value elements elicited in prior work to identify gaps and areas for future research.

RESULTS

Of 86 published CEAs, we found that 7 included patient out-of-pocket costs, and 32 included measures of productivity, which were both priorities for individuals with MDD. We found that only 2 studies elicited measures from patients for their model, and 2 studies engaged patients in the modeling process.

CONCLUSIONS

Published CEA models for MDD treatment do not regularly include value elements that are a priority for this patient population nor do they include patients in their modeling process. Flexible models that can accommodate elements consistent with patient experience are needed, and a multistakeholder engagement approach would help accomplish this.

Economic evaluation of interventions for treatment-resistant depression: A systematic review

Background

The extraordinarily high prevalence of treatment-resistant depression (TRD), coupled with its high economic burden to both healthcare systems and society, underscore how critical it is that resources are managed optimally to address the significant challenge it presents.

Objective

To review the literature on economic evaluation in TRD systematically, with the aim of informing future studies by identifying key challenges specific to the area, and highlighting good practices.

Methods

A systematic literature search across seven electronic databases was conducted to identify both within-trial and model-based economic evaluations in TRD. Quality of reporting and study design was assessed using the Consensus Health Economic Criteria (CHEC). A narrative synthesis was conducted.

Results

We identified 31 evaluations, including 11 conducted alongside a clinical trial and 20 model-based evaluations. There was considerable heterogeneity in the definition of treatment-resistant depression, although with a trend for more recent studies to use a definition of inadequate response to two or more antidepressive treatments. A broad range of interventions were considered, including non-pharmacological neuromodulation, pharmacological, psychological, and service-level interventions. Study quality as assessed by CHEC was generally high. Frequently poorly reported items related to discussion of ethical and distributional issues, and model validation. Most evaluations considered comparable core clinical outcomes - encompassing remission, response, and relapse. There was good agreement on the definitions and thresholds for these outcomes, and a relatively small pool of outcome measures were used. Resource criteria used to inform the estimation of direct costs, were reasonably uniform. Predominantly, however, there was a high level of heterogeneity in terms of evaluation design and sophistication, quality of evidence used (particularly health state utility data), time horizon, population considered, and cost perspective.

Conclusion

Economic evidence for interventions in TRD is underdeveloped, particularly so for service-level interventions. Where evidence does exist, it is hampered by inconsistency in study design, methodological quality, and availability of high quality long-term outcomes evidence. This review identifies a number of key considerations and challenges for the design of future economic evaluations. Recommendations for research and suggestions for good practice are made.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=259848&VersionID=1542096, identifier CRD42021259848.

A Promising Approach to Optimizing Sequential Treatment Decisions for Depression: Markov Decision Process

The most appropriate next step in depression treatment after the initial treatment fails is unclear. This study explores the suitability of the Markov decision process for optimizing sequential treatment decisions for depression. We conducted a formal comparison of a Markov decision process approach and mainstream state-transition models as used in health economic decision analysis to clarify differences in the model structure. We performed two reviews: the first to identify existing applications of the Markov decision process in the field of healthcare and the second to identify existing health economic models for depression. We then illustrated the application of a Markov decision process by reformulating an existing health economic model. This provided input for discussing the suitability of a Markov decision process for solving sequential treatment decisions in depression. The Markov decision process and state-transition models differed in terms of flexibility in modeling actions and rewards. In all, 23 applications of a Markov decision process within the context of somatic disease were included, 16 of which concerned sequential treatment decisions. Most existing health economic models relating to depression have a state-transition structure. The example application replicated the health economic model and enabled additional capacity to make dynamic comparisons of more interventions over time than was possible with traditional state-transition models. Markov decision processes have been successfully applied to address sequential treatment-decision problems, although the results have been published mostly in economics journals that are not related to healthcare. One advantage of a Markov decision process compared with state-transition models is that it allows extended action space: the possibility of making dynamic comparisons of different treatments over time. Within the context of depression, although existing state-transition models are too basic to evaluate sequential treatment decisions, the assumptions of a Markov decision process could be satisfied. The Markov decision process could therefore serve as a powerful model for optimizing sequential treatment in depression. This would require a sufficiently elaborate state-transition model at the cohort or patient level.

Revisiting the effectiveness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment in depression, again

Following on from the publication of the Royal Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry Mood Disorder Clinical Practice Guidelines (2020) and criticisms of how these aberrantly addressed repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment of depression, questions have continued to be raised in the journal about this treatment by a small group of authors, whose views we contend do not reflect the broad acceptance of this treatment nationally and internationally. In fact, the evidence supporting the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment in depression is unambiguous and substantial, consisting of an extensive series of clinical trials supported by multiple meta-analyses, network meta-analysis and umbrella reviews. Importantly, the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment in depression has also been subject to a series of health economic analyses. These indicate that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is a cost-effective therapy and have been used in some jurisdictions, including Australia, in support of public funding. An argument has been made that offering repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment may delay potentially effective pharmacotherapy. In fact, there is considerably greater danger of the opposite happening. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is as, if not more effective, than antidepressant medication after two unsuccessful medication trials and should be a consideration for all patients under these circumstances where available. There is no meaningful ongoing debate about the use of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment in depression - it is a safe, effective and cost-effective treatment.

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation may be a cost-effective alternative to antidepressant therapy after two treatment failures in patients with major depressive disorder

BACKGROUND

The cost-effectiveness of treatment strategies for patients with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) who have not responded to two adequate treatments with antidepressants (TRD) are still unclear. The aim of this analysis was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of add-on repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) compared with standard treatment.

METHODS

A Markov-model simulated clinical events over one year from the perspective of healthcare payer. Third- and fourth-line treatment pathways (augmentation, antidepressant switch or combination, and Electro-Convulsive Therapy (ECT)) were defined based on medical practice guidelines. Transition probabilities were derived from a recent meta-analysis and scientific publications. Resource utilization and cost estimates were based on the patient-level database of a large university hospital.

RESULTS

Incremental Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) and costs were 0.053 and 785 €, respectively, corresponding to an Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) of 14,670 € per QALY. The difference in cost between standard treatment and rTMS is explained by the rTMS sessions used in acute (€660) and maintenance (€57/month) treatments, partly offset by lower hospital costs due to higher remission rates in the rTMS arm. Key parameters driving the ICER were incremental utility of remission, unit cost of rTMS treatment and remission rate. At a threshold of €22,243 add-on rTMS is a cost-effective alternative to pharmacotherapy. Evidence on long-term effectiveness is not yet available, so results are estimated for a one-year period.

CONCLUSION

Not only does rTMS treatment have beneficial clinical effects compared with drug therapy in TRD, but it also appears to offer good value-for-money, especially in centres with larger numbers of patients where unit costs can be kept low.

Examining the correlation between treatment effects in clinical trials and economic modelling

INTRODUCTION

Many diseases have a sequential treatment pathway. Compared with patients without previous treatment, patients who fail initial treatment may have lower success rates with a second treatment. This phenomenon can be explained by a correlation between treatment effects.

METHODS

We developed a statistical model of covariance for the underlying unobserved correlation between treatments and established a mathematical expression for the magnitude of the latent correlation term. We conducted a simulation study of clinical trials to investigate the correlation between two treatments and explored clinical examples based on published literature to illustrate the identification and evaluation of these correlations.

RESULTS

Our simulation study confirmed that a treatment correlation reduces the probability of success for the second treatment, compared with no correlation. We found that treatment correlations may be observable in clinical trials, such as for depression and lung cancer, and the magnitude of correlation may be estimated. We illustrated that treatment correlations can be incorporated into an economic model, with possible impacts on cost-effectiveness results. Additional applications of correlation concepts are also discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

We evaluated the correlation between treatment effects and our approach can be applied to clinical trial design and economic modelling of sequential clinical treatment pathways.

rTMS combined with CBT as a next step in antidepressant non-responders: a study protocol for a randomized comparison with current antidepressant treatment approaches

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is one of the most common psychiatric disorders, however, current treatment options are insufficiently effective for about 35% of patients, resulting in treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a form of non-invasive neuromodulation that is effective in treating TRD. Not much is known about the comparative efficacy of rTMS and other treatments and their timing within the treatment algorithm, making it difficult for the treating physician to establish when rTMS is best offered as a treatment option. This study aims to investigate the (cost-)effectiveness of rTMS (in combination with cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and continued antidepressant medication), compared to the next step in the treatment algorithm. This will be done in a sample of patients with treatment resistant non-psychotic unipolar depression.

METHODS

In this pragmatic multicenter randomized controlled trial 132 patients with MDD are randomized to either rTMS or the next pharmacological step within the current treatment protocol (a switch to a tricyclic antidepressant or augmentation with lithium or a second-generation antipsychotic). Both groups also receive CBT. The trial consists of 8 weeks of unblinded treatment followed by follow-up of the cohort at four and 6 months. A subgroup of patients (n = 92) will have an extended follow-up at nine and 12 months to assess effect decay or retention. We expect that rTMS is more (cost-)effective than medication in reducing depressive symptoms in patients with TRD. We will also explore the effects of both treatments on symptoms associated with depression, e.g. anhedonia and rumination, as well as the effect of expectations regarding the treatments on its effectiveness.

DISCUSSION

The present trial aims to inform clinical decision making about whether rTMS should be considered as a treatment option in patients with TRD. The results may improve treatment outcomes in patients with TRD and may facilitate adoption of rTMS in the treatment algorithm for depression and its implementation in clinical practice.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial is registered within the Netherlands Trial Register (code: NL7628 , date: March 29th 2019).

Cost-utility analysis of esketamine and electroconvulsive therapy in adults with treatment-resistant depression

BACKGROUND

Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) has long been used for treating individuals with treatment-resistant depression (TRD). Esketamine has recently emerged as a new treatment for TRD due to its rapid antidepressant effects. To further inform the decision regarding choice of treatment, this paper aims to evaluate whether ECT or esketamine is the more cost-effective option.

METHODS

The cost-effectiveness was derived as cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) using a Markov model from a societal and life-time perspective. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated. Health states included different depression and remission states and death. Data to populate the model was derived from randomised controlled trials and other research. Various sensitivity analyses were carried out to test the robustness of the model.

RESULTS

The base case scenario shows that ECT is cost-effective compared to esketamine and yields more QALYs at a lower cost. The sensitivity analysis shows that ECT is cost-effective in all scenarios and ECT dominates esketamine in 12 scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that, from a cost-effectiveness point of view, ECT should be the first-hand option for individuals with TRD, when other first line treatments have failed. Considering the lack of economic evaluation of ECT and esketamine, this study is of great value to decision makers.

Neurostimulation therapies in major depressive disorder: A decision-analytic model

AIM

Neurostimulation techniques are effective treatments for major depressive disorders (MDD). However, the optimal sequence of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) as part of antidepressant treatment algorithm is unclear. We examined the cost-effectiveness of ECT and TMS in MDD.

METHODS

A decision-analytic model was developed to determine total costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for 10 strategies. Each strategy comprised four treatment lines with ECT and TMS incorporated as second, third, or fourth line. A scenario analysis that explored the cost-effectiveness of maintenance approach by continuing ECT and TMS after acute treatment was performed.

RESULTS

In the base case, fourth-line TMS after three preceding trials of antidepressants was least costly at US$ 5523 yielding 1.424 QALYs. Compared with this strategy, fourth-line ECT and third-line TMS followed by ECT were cost-effective with ICERs of US$ 7601 per QALY gained and US$ 11 388 per QALY gained, respectively. In the scenario analysis where continuation treatments of ECT and TMS were provided, third-line TMS followed by ECT was cost-effective, with an ICER of US$ 17 198 per QALY gained. Effectiveness of ECT and cost of managing severe depression were influential parameters affecting the cost-effectiveness results.

CONCLUSIONS

In acute treatment of MDD, fourth-line ECT was the most cost-effective strategy. In maintenance treatment, the strategy that incorporated third-line TMS and fourth-line ECT was cost-effective. The overall findings confirmed the value of neurostimulation therapies which should be offered early in the process of managing depression.

Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for People With Treatment-Resistant Depression: A Health Technology Assessment

BACKGROUND

Major depression is one of the most diagnosed mental illnesses in Canada. Generally, people are treated successfully with antidepressants or psychotherapy, but some people do not respond to these treatments (called treatment-resistant depression [TRD]). Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) delivers magnetic pulses to stimulate the areas of the brain associated with mood regulation. Several modalities of rTMS exist (e.g., high frequency rTMS, intermittent theta burst stimulation [iTBS], deep transcranial magnetic stimulation). We conducted a health technology assessment of rTMS for people with TRD, which included an evaluation of effectiveness, safety, cost-effectiveness, the budget impact of publicly funding rTMS, and patient preferences and values.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search of the clinical evidence. We assessed the risk of bias of each included study using the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews (ROBIS) tool and Cochrane Risk of Bias for Randomized Controlled Trials and the quality of the body of evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group criteria. We performed a systematic economic literature search and conducted a cost-utility analysis with a 3-year horizon from a public payer perspective. We also analyzed the 5-year budget impact of publicly funding rTMS for people with TRD in Ontario. To assess the potential value of rTMS, we spoke with people who have TRD. Seven rTMS modalities were considered: low-frequency (1 Hz) stimulation, high-frequency (10-20 Hz) stimulation, unilateral stimulation, bilateral stimulation, iTBS, continuous theta burst stimulation, and deep transcranial magnetic stimulation.

RESULTS

We included 58 primary studies, 9 systematic reviews, and 1 network meta-analysis in the clinical evidence review. Most rTMS modalities were more effective than sham treatment for all outcomes (GRADE: Moderate to High). All rTMS modalities were similar to one another in response and remission rates (GRADE: not reported) and were similar to electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in response and remission rates (GRADE: Moderate). Moreover, in both the reference case and scenario analyses, two rTMS modalities (rTMS or iTBS), followed by ECT when patients did not respond to initial treatment, were less expensive and more effective than ECT alone. They were cost-effective compared with pharmacotherapy alone at a willingness-to-pay amount of $50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). The annual budget impact of publicly funding rTMS would range from $9.3 million in year 1 to $15.76 million in year 5, for a total of $63.2 million over the next 5 years. People with TRD we spoke with reported that their experiences were generally favourable, and their attitudes toward rTMS were positive. Similarly, psychiatrists had positive attitudes toward and acceptance of rTMS. Our quantitative literature review on preferences revealed some gaps in psychiatrists' knowledge of rTMS, which could have been influenced by their level of training on rTMS.

CONCLUSIONS

Most rTMS modalities are likely more effective than sham rTMS on all outcomes. All rTMS modalities are similar to ECT and to one another in response and remission rates. Compared with ECT alone, two rTMS modalities (high-frequency rTMS and iTBS), followed by ECT when necessary in a stepped care pathway, were less costly and more effective for managing adults with TRD. These types of rTMS (high-frequency rTMS and iTBS) were cost-effective compared with pharmacotherapy alone at a willingness-to-pay amount of $50,000 per QALY. Publicly funding rTMS (high-frequency rTMS and iTBS) for the treatment of adults with TRD in Ontario over the next 5 years would add $63.2 million in total costs. People with TRD had positive experiences and attitudes toward rTMS.

Value of Electroconvulsive Therapy in the General Public: A Willingness to Pay Study in Germany

OBJECTIVE

The aims of this study were to estimate the value a population-representative sample places on electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) through willingness to pay (WTP) and to assess the effects of individual characteristics on WTP for ECT.

METHODS

A German population-representative sample of 518 was presented with a hypothetical health loss scenario of depression and was asked to indicate WTP for ECT. Probit and quantile regression were used to estimate the effects of individual characteristics on the probability of stating a positive WTP and on the amount of money respondents were willing to pay.

RESULTS

Two thirds of respondents stated that they had no knowledge about ECT. Most (56.5%) respondents indicated zero WTP for health gains through ECT treatment. Mean WTP was €5201 ($5612); median WTP was €1000 ($1079). Respondents' monthly household income had a significant effect on the probability of stating a positive WTP. Assessing WTP above zero, income showed a significant positive effect, whereas a higher score of depressive complaints showed a significant negative effect on the amount respondents were willing to pay.

CONCLUSION

Knowledge about ECT treatment is particularly low in the German public.

A Measure to Assess Perceptions and Knowledge About Electroconvulsive Therapy: Development and Psychometric Properties

OBJECTIVES

Although electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) has been found to be one of the most robust and rapid treatments for severe depression, it is widely underused partly because of negative perceptions and inaccurate knowledge about the treatment.

METHODS

The 18-item ECT Perception and Knowledge (ECT-PK) measure was developed through a systematic review of the literature, subject matter expert ratings, and examination of content validity. The ECT-PK consists of Perception and Knowledge subscales, which were tested on a national sample of 1091 US adults who screened positive for depression in 2018 through Amazon's Mechanical Turk platform.

RESULTS

Evaluation of the ECT-PK subscales found that both subscales demonstrated good construct validity, criterion validity, and internal consistency reliability. Participants who had higher Perception and Knowledge subscale scores were significantly more likely to report that they were willing to try ECT. The ECT-PK revealed that many participants reported fears about pain, brain damage, and memory loss resulting from ECT, and had inaccurate knowledge about ECT being outdated or lacking scientific evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Together, these results showed that the ECT-PK is an efficient and effective contemporary tool to measure the perception and knowledge of ECT, and highlights areas in need of psychoeducation.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Electroconvulsive Therapy and Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Treatment-Resistant Depression in Ontario

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), and combining both treatments in a stepped care pathway for patients with treatment-resistant depression (TRD) in Ontario.

METHODS

A cost-utility analysis evaluated the lifetime costs and benefits to society of rTMS and ECT as first-line treatments for TRD using a Markov model, which simulates the costs and health benefits of patients over their lifetime. Health states included acute treatment, maintenance treatment, remission, and severe depression. Treatment efficacy and health utility data were extracted and synthesized from randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses evaluating these techniques. Direct costing data were obtained from national and provincial costing databases. Indirect costs were derived from government records. Scenario, threshold, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to test robustness of the results.

RESULTS

rTMS dominated ECT, as it was less costly and produced better health outcomes, measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), in the base case scenario. rTMS patients gained an average of 0.96 additional QALYs (equivalent to approximately 1 year in perfect health) over their lifetime with costs that were $46,094 less than ECT. rTMS remained dominant in the majority of scenario and threshold analyses. However, results from scenarios in which the model's maximum lifetime allowance of rTMS treatment courses was substantially limited, the dominance of rTMS over ECT was attenuated. The scenario that showed the highest QALY gain (1.19) and the greatest cost-savings ($46,614) was when rTMS nonresponders switched to ECT.

CONCLUSION

From a societal perspective utilizing a lifetime horizon, rTMS is a cost-effective first-line treatment option for TRD relative to ECT, as it is less expensive and produces better health outcomes. The reduced side effect profile and greater patient acceptability of rTMS that allow it to be administered more times than ECT in a patient's lifetime may contribute to its cost-effectiveness.

Effectiveness of electroconvulsive therapy on treatment-resistant depressive disorder: A population-based mirror-image study

The clinical effects of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) in treatment-resistant depressive disorders need to be systemically examined in representative samples. This study aimed to examine whether ECT reduced re-hospitalization within one year after discharge. The authors used the Psychiatric Inpatients Medical Claim Dataset, a subset of a total population health claims database from Taiwan, to include 784 inpatients with treatment-resistant depressive disorders screened for ECT during hospitalization between 2001 and 2011. The same number of comparison subjects was selected by frequency matching on the demographic and clinical characteristics. Using a mirror-image comparison design, we compared group differences in re-hospitalization rate, number of hospital days, number of emergency department visits, and direct medical costs during the 1-year pre- and post-ECT periods. The modifying effects of patients' characteristics on these outcomes were also explored. The results showed that ECT was associated with a significant decrease in the rate of hospitalizations and emergency department visits over the 1-year follow-up period. However, there were no significant difference in the reduced rate of hospitalizations between ECT and comparison group. Demographic and clinical characteristic had no modifying effect on the odds of psychiatric hospitalization. In conclusions, ECT could reduce the rate of hospitalization and number of emergency department visits in patients with treatment-resistant depressive disorders. However, the study results might be biased by the inherent deficits of mirror-image design.

Implementation of intermittent theta burst stimulation compared to conventional repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in patients with treatment resistant depression: A cost analysis

Background

Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is an evidence-based treatment for depression that is increasingly implemented in healthcare systems across the world. A new form of rTMS called intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS) can be delivered in 3 min and has demonstrated comparable effectiveness to the conventional 37.5 min 10Hz rTMS protocol in patients with depression.

Objectives

To compare the direct treatment costs per course and per remission for iTBS compared to 10Hz rTMS treatment in depression.

Methods

We conducted a cost analysis from a healthcare system perspective using patient-level data from a large randomized non-inferiority trial (THREE-D). Depressed adults 18 to 65 received either 10Hz rTMS or iTBS treatment. Treatment costs were calculated using direct healthcare costs associated with equipment, coils, physician assessments and technician time over the course of treatment. Cost per remission was estimated using the proportion of patients achieving remission following treatment. Deterministic sensitivity analyses and non-parametric bootstrapping was used to estimate uncertainty.

Results

From a healthcare system perspective, the average cost per patient was USD$1,108 (SD 166) for a course of iTBS and $1,844 (SD 304) for 10Hz rTMS, with an incremental net savings of $735 (95% CI 688 to 783). The average cost per remission was $3,695 (SD 552) for iTBS and $6,146 (SD 1,015) for 10Hz rTMS, with an average incremental net savings of $2,451 (95% CI 2,293 to 2,610).

Conclusions

The shorter session durations and treatment capacity increase associated with 3 min iTBS translate into significant cost-savings per patient and per remission when compared to 10Hz rTMS.

Internet-Delivered Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for Major Depression and Anxiety Disorders: A Health Technology Assessment

BACKGROUND

Major depression is defined as a period of depression lasting at least 2 weeks characterized by depressed mood, most of the day, nearly every day, and/or markedly diminished interest or pleasure in all, or almost all, activities. Anxiety disorders encompass a broad range of disorders in which people experience feelings of fear and excessive worry that interfere with normal day-to-day functioning.Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) is a form of evidence-based psychotherapy used to treat major depression and anxiety disorders. Internet-delivered CBT (iCBT) is structured, goal-oriented CBT delivered via the internet. It may be guided, in which the patient communicates with a regulated health care professional, or unguided, in which the patient is not supported by a regulated health care professional.

METHODS

We conducted a health technology assessment, which included an evaluation of clinical benefit, value for money, and patient preferences and values related to the use of iCBT for the treatment of mild to moderate major depression or anxiety disorders. We performed a systematic review of the clinical and economic literature and conducted a grey literature search. We reported Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) ratings if sufficient information was provided. When other quality assessment tools were used by the systematic review authors in the included studies, these were reported. We assessed the risk of bias within the included reviews. We also developed decision-analytic models to compare the costs and benefits of unguided iCBT, guided iCBT, face-to-face CBT, and usual care over 1 year using a sequential approach. We further explored the lifetime and short-term cost-effectiveness of stepped-care models, including iCBT, compared with usual care. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) from the perspective of the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care and estimated the 5-year budget impact of publicly funding iCBT for mild to moderate major depression or anxiety disorders in Ontario. To contextualize the potential value of iCBT as a treatment option for major depression or anxiety disorders, we spoke with people with these conditions.

RESULTS

People who had undergone guided iCBT for mild to moderate major depression (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.83, 95% CI 0.59-1.07, GRADE moderate), generalized anxiety disorder (SMD = 0.84, 95% CI 0.45-1.23, GRADE low), panic disorder (small to very large effects, GRADE low), and social phobia (SMD = 0.85, 95% CI 0.66-1.05, GRADE moderate) showed a statistically significant improvement in symptoms compared with people on a waiting list. People who had undergone iCBT for panic disorder (SMD= 1.15, 95% CI: 0.94 to 1.37) and iCBT for social anxiety disorder (SMD=0.91, 95% CI: 0.74-1.07) showed a statistically significant improvement in symptoms compared with people on a waiting list. There was a statistically significant improvement in quality of life for people with generalized anxiety disorder who had undergone iCBT (SMD = 0.38, 95% CI 0.08-0.67) compared with people on a waiting list. The mean differences between people who had undergone iCBT compared with usual care at 3, 5, and 8 months were -4.3, -3.9, and -5.9, respectively. The negative mean difference at each follow-up showed an improvement in symptoms of depression for participants randomized to the iCBT group compared with usual care. People who had undergone guided iCBT showed no statistically significant improvement in symptoms of panic disorder compared with individual or group face-to-face CBT (d = 0.00, 95% CI -0.41 to 0.41, GRADE very low). Similarly, there was no statistically significant difference in symptoms of specific phobia in people who had undergone guided iCBT compared with brief therapist-led exposure (GRADE very low). There was a small statistically significant improvement in symptoms in favour of guided iCBT compared with group face-to-face CBT (d= 0.41, 95% CI 0.03-0.78, GRADE low) for social phobia. There was no statistically significant improvement in quality of life reported for people with panic disorder who had undergone iCBT compared with face-to-face CBT (SMD = -0.07, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.21).Guided iCBT was the optimal strategy in the reference case cost-utility analyses. For adults with mild to moderate major depression, guided iCBT was associated with increases in both quality-adjusted survival (0.04 quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs]) and cost ($1,257), yielding an ICER of $31,575 per QALY gained when compared with usual care. In adults with anxiety disorders, guided iCBT was also associated with increases in both quality-adjusted survival (0.03 QALYs) and cost ($1,395), yielding an ICER of $43,214 per QALY gained when compared with unguided iCBT. In this population, guided iCBT was associated with an ICER of $26,719 per QALY gained when compared with usual care. The probability of cost-effectiveness of guided iCBT for major depression and anxiety disorders, respectively, was 67% and 70% at willingness-to-pay of $100,000 per QALY gained. Guided iCBT delivered within stepped-care models appears to represent good value for money for the treatment of mild to moderate major depression and anxiety disorders.Assuming a 3% increase in access per year (from about 8,000 people in year 1 to about 32,000 people in year 5), the net budget impact of publicly funding guided iCBT for the treatment of mild to moderate major depression would range from about $10 million in year 1 to about $40 million in year 5. The corresponding net budget impact for the treatment of anxiety disorders would range from about $16 million in year 1 (about 13,000 people) to about $65 million in year 5 (about 52,000 people).People with depression or an anxiety disorder with whom we spoke reported that iCBT improves access for those who face challenges with face-to-face therapy because of costs, time, or the severity of their condition. They reported that iCBT provides better control over the pace, time, and location of therapy, as well as greater access to educational material. Some reported barriers to iCBT include the cost of therapy; the need for a computer and internet access, computer literacy, and the ability to understand complex written information. Language and disability barriers also exist. Reported limitations to iCBT include the ridigity of the program, the lack of face-to-face interactions with a therapist, technological difficulties, and the inability of an internet protocol to treat severe depression and some types of anxiety disorder.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with waiting list, guided iCBT is effective and likely results in symptom improvement in mild to moderate major depression and social phobia. Guided iCBT may improve the symptoms of generalized anxiety disorder and panic disorder compared with waiting list. However, we are uncertain about the effectiveness of iCBT compared with individual or group face-to-face CBT. Guided iCBT represents good value for money and could be offered for the short-term treatment of adults with mild to moderate major depression or anxiety disorders. Most people with mild to moderate depression or anxiety disorders with whom we spoke felt that, despite some perceived limitations, iCBT provides greater control over the time, pace, and location of therapy. It also improves access for people who could not otherwise access therapy because of cost, time, or the nature of their health condition.

Cost-effectiveness of Electroconvulsive Therapy vs Pharmacotherapy/Psychotherapy for Treatment-Resistant Depression in the United States

IMPORTANCE

Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is a highly effective treatment for depression but is infrequently used owing to stigma, uncertainty about indications, adverse effects, and perceived high cost.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of ECT compared with pharmacotherapy/psychotherapy for treatment-resistant major depressive disorder in the United States.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A decision analytic model integrating data on clinical efficacy, costs, and quality-of-life effects of ECT compared with pharmacotherapy/psychotherapy was used to simulate depression treatment during a 4-year horizon from a US health care sector perspective. Model input data were drawn from multiple meta-analyses, randomized trials, and observational studies of patients with depression. Where possible, data sources were restricted to US-based studies of nonpsychotic major depression. Data were analyzed between June 2017 and January 2018.

INTERVENTIONS

Six alternative strategies for incorporating ECT into depression treatment (after failure of 0-5 lines of pharmacotherapy/psychotherapy) compared with no ECT.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Remission, response, and nonresponse of depression; quality-adjusted life-years; costs in 2013 US dollars; and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Strategies with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $100 000 per quality-adjusted life-year or less were designated cost-effective.

RESULTS

Based on the Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression trial, we simulated a population with a mean (SD) age of 40.7 (13.2) years, and 62.2% women. Over 4 years, ECT was projected to reduce time with uncontrolled depression from 50% of life-years to 33% to 37% of life-years, with greater improvements when ECT is offered earlier. Mean health care costs were increased by $7300 to $12 000, with greater incremental costs when ECT was offered earlier. In the base case, third-line ECT was cost-effective, with an ICER of $54 000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Third-line ECT remained cost-effective in a range of univariate, scenario, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. Incorporating all input data uncertainty, we estimate a 74% to 78% likelihood that at least 1 of the ECT strategies is cost-effective and a 56% to 58% likelihood that third-line ECT is the optimal strategy.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

For US patients with treatment-resistant depression, ECT may be an effective and cost-effective treatment option. Although many factors influence the decision to proceed with ECT, these data suggest that, from a health-economic standpoint, ECT should be considered after failure of 2 or more lines of pharmacotherapy/psychotherapy.

Economic evaluation of an experience sampling method intervention in depression compared with treatment as usual using data from a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Experience sampling, a method for real-time self-monitoring of affective experiences, holds opportunities for person-tailored treatment. By focussing on dynamic patterns of positive affect, experience sampling method interventions (ESM-I) accommodate strategies to enhance personalized treatment of depression-at potentially low-costs. This study aimed to investigate the cost-effectiveness of an experience sampling method intervention in patients with depression, from a societal perspective.

METHODS

Participants were recruited between January 2010 and February 2012 from out-patient mental health care facilities in or near the Dutch cities of Eindhoven and Maastricht, and through local advertisements. Out-patients diagnosed with major depression (n = 101) receiving pharmacotherapy were randomized into: (i) ESM-I consisting of six weeks of ESM combined with weekly feedback regarding the individual's positive affective experiences, (ii) six weeks of ESM without feedback, or (iii) treatment as usual only. Alongside this randomised controlled trial, an economic evaluation was conducted consisting of a cost-effectiveness and a cost-utility analysis, using Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) as outcome, with willingness-to-pay threshold for a QALY set at €50,000 (based on Dutch guidelines for moderate severe to severe illnesses).

RESULTS

The economic evaluation showed that ESM-I is an optimal strategy only when willingness to pay is around €3000 per unit HDRS and around €40,500 per QALY. ESM-I was the least favourable treatment when willingness to pay was lower than €30,000 per QALY. However, at the €50,000 willingness-to-pay threshold, ESM-I was, with a 46% probability, the most favourable treatment (base-case analysis). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of these results.

CONCLUSIONS

We may tentatively conclude that ESM-I is a cost-effective add-on intervention to pharmacotherapy in outpatients with major depression.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial register, NTR1974 .

Cost-Effectiveness Modeling of Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Compared to Electroconvulsive Therapy for Treatment-Resistant Depression in Singapore

BACKGROUND

Compared to electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), the cost-effectiveness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) in the management of treatment-resistant depression (TRD) remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS

This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of rTMS vs. ECT for TRD from Singapore societal perspective.

METHODS

We constructed a Markov model to project the cost and benefit of rTMS compared with ECT over one year in patients with TRD. The relative treatment effects between rTMS and ECT were obtained from meta-analyses of published trials. The effectiveness and quality of life data for patients using ECT, resource use for TRD and their associated costs were derived from the national tertiary mental institution in Singapore.

RESULTS

At one year, rTMS was cost-effective relative to ECT. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) associated with ECT was Singapore dollars (SGD) 311,024 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. This exceeded the willingness-to-pay threshold of SGD 70,000 per QALY gained. A similar trend was observed for ICER per remission achieved (i.e., SGD 143,811 per remission achieved with ECT). In the subgroup analysis, rTMS was found to be less costly and more effective than ECT in nonpsychotic depressive patients. In the scenario analysis, ECT employed as an ambulatory service yielded a much smaller ICER (i.e., SGD 78,819 per QALY gained) compared to the standard inpatient setting.

CONCLUSIONS

rTMS was a cost-effective treatment compared to ECT in TRD over one year. The cost-effectiveness of rTMS was attenuated when ECT was used in the outpatient setting.

Psychotherapy for Major Depressive Disorder and Generalized Anxiety Disorder: A Health Technology Assessment

BACKGROUND

Major depressive disorder and generalized anxiety disorder are among the most commonly diagnosed mental illnesses in Canada; both are associated with a high societal and economic burden. Treatment for major depressive disorder and generalized anxiety disorder consists of pharmacological and psychological interventions. Three commonly used psychological interventions are cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), interpersonal therapy, and supportive therapy. The objectives of this report were to assess the effectiveness and safety of these types of therapy for the treatment of adults with major depressive disorder and/or generalized anxiety disorder, to assess the cost-effectiveness of structured psychotherapy (CBT or interpersonal therapy), to calculate the budget impact of publicly funding structured psychotherapy, and to gain a greater understanding of the experiences of people with major depressive disorder and/or generalized anxiety disorder.

METHODS

We performed a literature search on October 27, 2016, for systematic reviews that compared CBT, interpersonal therapy, or supportive therapy with usual care, waitlist control, or pharmacotherapy in adult outpatients with major depressive disorder and/or generalized anxiety disorder. We developed an individual-level state-transition probabilistic model for a cohort of adult outpatients aged 18 to 75 years with a primary diagnosis of major depressive disorder to determine the cost-effectiveness of individual or group CBT (as a representative form of structured psychotherapy) versus usual care. We also estimated the 5-year budget impact of publicly funding structured psychotherapy in Ontario. Finally, we interviewed people with major depressive disorder and/or generalized anxiety disorder to better understand the impact of their condition on their daily lives and their experience with different treatment options, including psychotherapy.

RESULTS

Interpersonal therapy compared with usual care reduced posttreatment major depressive disorder scores (standardized mean difference [SMD]: 0.24, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.47 to -0.02) and reduced relapse/recurrence in patients with major depressive disorder (relative risk [RR]: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.27-0.63). Supportive therapy compared with usual care improved major depressive disorder scores (SMD: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.45-0.72) and increased posttreatment recovery (odds ratio [OR]: 2.71, 95% CI: 1.19-6.16) in patients with major depressive disorder. CBT compared with usual care increased response (OR: 1.58, 95% CI: 1.11-2.26) and recovery (OR: 3.42, 95% CI: 1.98-5.93) in patients with major depressive disorder and decreased relapse/recurrence (RR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.65-0.87]). For patients with generalized anxiety disorder, CBT improved symptoms posttreatment (SMD: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.67-0.93), improved clinical response posttreatment (RR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.55-0.74), and improved quality-of-life scores (SMD: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.06-0.82). There was a significant difference in posttreatment recovery (OR: 1.98, 95% CI: 1.11-3.54) and mean major depressive disorder symptom scores (weighted mean difference: -3.07, 95% CI: -4.69 to -1.45) for patients who received individual versus group CBT. Details about the providers of psychotherapy were rarely reported in the systematic reviews we examined.In the base case probabilistic cost-utility analysis, compared with usual care, both group and individual CBT were associated with increased survival: 0.11 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) (95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.03-0.22) and 0.12 QALYs (95% CrI: 0.03-0.25), respectively.Group CBT provided by nonphysicians was associated with the smallest increase in discounted costs: $401 (95% CrI: $1,177 to 1,665). Group CBT provided by physicians, individual CBT provided by nonphysicians, and individual CBT provided by physicians were associated with the incremental costs of $1,805 (95% CrI: 65-3,516), $3,168 (95% CrI: 889-5,624), and $5,311 (95% CrI: 2,539-8,938), respectively. The corresponding incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was lowest for group CBT provided by nonphysicians ($3,715/QALY gained) and highest for individual CBT provided by physicians ($43,443/QALY gained). In the analysis that ranked best strategies, individual CBT versus group CBT provided by nonphysicians yielded an ICER of $192,618 per QALY. The probability of group CBT provided by nonphysicians being cost-effective versus usual care was greater than 95% for all willingness-to-pay thresholds over $20,000 per QALY and was around 88% for individual CBT provided by physicians at a threshold of $100,000 per QALY.We estimated that adding structured psychotherapy to usual care over the next 5 years would result in a net budget impact of $68 million to $529 million, depending on a range of factors. We also estimated that to provide structured psychotherapy to all adults with major depressive disorder (alone or combined with generalized anxiety disorder) in Ontario by 2021, an estimated 500 therapists would be needed to provide group therapy, and 2,934 therapists would be needed to provide individual therapy.People with major depressive disorder and/or generalized anxiety disorder with whom we spoke reported finding psychotherapy effective, but they also reported experiencing a large number of barriers that prevented them from finding effective psychotherapy in a timely manner. Participants reported wanting more freedom to choose the type of psychotherapy they received.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with usual care, treatment with CBT, interpersonal therapy, or supportive therapy significantly reduces depression symptoms posttreatment. CBT significantly reduces anxiety symptoms posttreatment in patients with generalized anxiety disorder.Compared with usual care, treatment with structured psychotherapy (CBT or interpersonal therapy) represents good value for money for adults with major depressive disorder and/or generalized anxiety disorder. The most affordable option is group structured psychotherapy provided by nonphysicians, with the selective use of individual structured psychotherapy provided by nonphysicians or physicians for those who would benefit most from it (i.e., patients who are not engaging well with or adhering to group therapy).

Cost effectiveness analysis comparing repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation to antidepressant medications after a first treatment failure for major depressive disorder in newly diagnosed patients - A lifetime analysis

Objective

Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) commonly is used for the treatment of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) after patients have failed to benefit from trials of multiple antidepressant medications. No analysis to date has examined the cost-effectiveness of rTMS used earlier in the course of treatment and over a patients’ lifetime.

Methods

We used lifetime Markov simulation modeling to compare the direct costs and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) of rTMS and medication therapy in patients with newly diagnosed MDD (ages 20–59) who had failed to benefit from one pharmacotherapy trial. Patients’ life expectancies, rates of response and remission, and quality of life outcomes were derived from the literature, and treatment costs were based upon published Medicare reimbursement data. Baseline costs, aggregate per year quality of life assessments (QALYs), Monte Carlo simulation, tornado analysis, assessment of dominance, and one way sensitivity analysis were also performed. The discount rate applied was 3%.

Results

Lifetime direct treatment costs, and QALYs identified rTMS as the dominant therapy compared to antidepressant medications (i.e., lower costs with better outcomes) in all age ranges, with costs/improved QALYs ranging from $2,952/0.32 (older patients) to $11,140/0.43 (younger patients). One-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the model was most sensitive to the input variables of cost per rTMS session, monthly prescription drug cost, and the number of rTMS sessions per year.

Conclusion

rTMS was identified as the dominant therapy compared to antidepressant medication trials over the life of the patient across the lifespan of adults with MDD, given current costs of treatment. These models support the use of rTMS after a single failed antidepressant medication trial versus further attempts at medication treatment in adults with MDD.

Model-Based Economic Evaluation of Treatments for Depression: A Systematic Literature Review

BACKGROUND

An increasing number of model-based studies that evaluate the cost effectiveness of treatments for depression are being published. These studies have different characteristics and use different simulation methods.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to systematically review model-based studies evaluating the cost effectiveness of treatments for depression and examine which modelling technique is most appropriate for simulating the natural course of depression.

METHODS

The literature search was conducted in the databases PubMed, EMBASE and PsycInfo between 1 January 2002 and 1 October 2016. Studies were eligible if they used a health economic model with quality-adjusted life-years or disability-adjusted life-years as an outcome measure. Data related to various methodological characteristics were extracted from the included studies. The available modelling techniques were evaluated based on 11 predefined criteria.

RESULTS

This methodological review included 41 model-based studies, of which 21 used decision trees (DTs), 15 used cohort-based state-transition Markov models (CMMs), two used individual-based state-transition models (ISMs), and three used discrete-event simulation (DES) models. Just over half of the studies (54%) evaluated antidepressants compared with a control condition. The data sources, time horizons, cycle lengths, perspectives adopted and number of health states/events all varied widely between the included studies. DTs scored positively in four of the 11 criteria, CMMs in five, ISMs in six, and DES models in seven.

CONCLUSION

There were substantial methodological differences between the studies. Since the individual history of each patient is important for the prognosis of depression, DES and ISM simulation methods may be more appropriate than the others for a pragmatic representation of the course of depression. However, direct comparisons between the available modelling techniques are necessary to yield firm conclusions.

Long-term Effectiveness of Modified Electroconvulsive Therapy Compared With Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for the Treatment of Recurrent Major Depressive Disorder

This retrospective study recruited 150 patients with recurrent major depressive disorder (MDD) who received modified electroconvulsive therapy (MECT) and 150 cases treated with repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), which aimed to compare the short- and long-term effectiveness, as well as economic outcomes, of MECT and rTMS with a large sample size in patients with recurrent MDD. The results showed that the response rate of patients in the rTMS group was lower than that in the MECT group (46.0% vs 58.7%, p < 0.05). Patients in the rTMS group had elevated rate of dizziness, but reduced rates of poor memory and headache, as well as lower costs compared with the MECT group (p < 0.05). Importantly, we found that the relapse-free survival of patients was similar between the rTMS and MECT groups in the long term. In conclusion, rTMS is an alternative method for MECT in the treatment of patients with recurrent MDD.

The Psychiatric Patient as a Health Resource Consumer: Costs Associated with Electroconvulsive Therapy

BACKGROUND

Clinical practice protocols should consider both the psychological criteria related to a patient's satisfaction as a consumer of health services and the economic criteria to allocate resources efficiently. An electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) program was implemented in our hospital to treat psychiatric patients. The main objective of this study was to determine the cost associated with the ECT sessions implemented in our hospital between 2008 and 2014. A secondary objective was to calculate the cost of sessions that were considered ineffective, defined as those sessions in which electrical convulsion did not reach the preset threshold duration, in order to identify possible ways of saving money and improving satisfaction among psychiatric patients receiving ECT.

METHODS

A descriptive analysis of the direct health costs related to ECT from the perspective of the public health system between 2008 and 2014 was performed using a retrospective chart review. All of the costs are in euros (2011) and were discounted at a rate of 3%. Based on the base case, a sensitivity analysis of the changes of those variables showing the greatest uncertainty was performed.

RESULTS

Seventy-six patients received 853 sessions of ECT. The cumulative cost of these sessions was €1409528.63, and 92.9% of this cost corresponded to the hospital stay. A total of €420732.57 (29.8%) was inefficiently spent on 269 ineffective sessions. A sensitivity analysis of the economic data showed stable results to changes in the variables of uncertainty.

CONCLUSION

The efficiency of ECT in the context outlined here could be increased by discerning a way to shorten the associated hospital stay and by reducing the number of ineffective sessions performed.

Influence of GRIK4 genetic variants on the electroconvulsive therapy response

Several lines of evidence have shown the involvement of the glutamatergic system in the function of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). In particular, patients with treatment resistant depression (TRD) and chronic depression have lower levels of glutamate/glutamine than controls, and ECT can reverse this deficit. Genetic factors might contribute to modulating the mechanisms underlying ECT. This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between three polymorphisms (rs1954787, rs4936554 and rs11218030) of the glutamate receptor ionotropic kainate 4 (GRIK4) gene and responsiveness to ECT treatment in a sample of one hundred individuals, TRD or depressive Bipolar Disorder patients resistant to pharmacological treatments. The results revealed that GRIK4 variants were significantly associated with the response to ECT. In particular, we found that patients carrying the G allele of the GRIK4 rs11218030 had a significantly poorer response to ECT (p=2.71×10(-4)), showing five times the risk of relapse after ECT compared to the AA homozygotes. Analogously, patients carrying the GG rs1954787 genotype and rs4936554A allele carriers presented a double risk of lack of response after ECT (p=0.013 and p=0.040, respectively). In conclusion, the current study provides new evidence, indicating that some GRIK4 variants modulate the response to ECT in patients with depression resistant to treatment, suggesting a role for kainate receptor modulation.

Comparison between neurostimulation techniques repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation vs electroconvulsive therapy for the treatment of resistant depression: patient preference and cost-effectiveness

OBJECTIVES

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a common disorder, widely distributed in the population, and is often associated with severe symptoms and functional impairment. It has been estimated that 30% of MDD patients do not benefit adequately from therapeutic interventions, including pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy. Treatment-resistant depression (TRD) is generally defined as a failure to achieve remission, despite therapeutic interventions.

AIM

The most effective treatment alternatives for TRD are hospitalization, electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Here we compared the clinical effectiveness of ECT and TMS, including success rates, patient responses, side-effect profiles, and financial worthiness.

RESULTS

We found that ECT (P<0.0001) was more effective than TMS (P<0.012) (not statistically significant in group effect) in TRD patients. However, ECT patients reported a higher percentage of side effects (P<0.01) and the TMS treatment scored better in terms of patient preference. The cost benefit of ECT was higher than that of TMS (US$2075 vs US$814). Patient's preferences for treatment could be more intense in the TMS, if the TMS is included in the Health Maintenance Organization's service list.

CONCLUSION

We propose that both of these treatment options should be available in psychiatric wards, thus expanding the therapeutic toolkit for TRD.

A clinical repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation service in Australia: 6 years on

OBJECTIVE

There is considerable research evidence for the effectiveness of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation in the treatment of depression. However, there is little information about its acceptability and outcomes in clinical settings.

METHOD

This naturalistic study reports on a clinical repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation service that has been running in Adelaide, South Australia (SA), for 6 years. During this time, 214 complete acute courses were provided to patients with treatment-resistant Major Depressive Disorder. Patients received either sequential bilateral or right unilateral repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation treatment involving either 18 or 20 sessions given over 6 or 4 weeks respectively. Data included patient demographic details, duration of depression, and medication at the beginning of their repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation course. The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale was used to assess response to repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation.

RESULTS

Of those undergoing a first-time acute treatment course of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (N = 167), 28% achieved remission, while a further 12% met the criteria for a response to treatment. Most patients (N = 123, 77%) had previously been treated with five or more antidepressant medications, and 77 (47%) had previously received electroconvulsive therapy. Referral rates remained high over the 6 years, indicating acceptance of the treatment by referring psychiatrists. There were no significant adverse events, and the treatment was generally well tolerated. In all, 41 patients (25%) had a second course of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and 6 (4%) patients had a third course; 21 patients subsequently received maintenance repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation.

CONCLUSION

This naturalistic study showed that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation was well accepted by both psychiatrists and patients, and has good efficacy and safety. Furthermore, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation can provide a useful treatment alternative as part of outpatient mental health services for people with depression.

Antidepression medication improves quality of life in elderly patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia and depression

We aim to explore the influence of an antidepression medication on symptom scores and quality of life in elderly patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia accompanied by depression. We conducted a randomized controlled clinical trial which included 94 elderly patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia accompanied by depression in Xuan Wu Hospital and Beijing Boai Hospital during August 2008 to May 2012. The study was designed to compare outcomes related to patient quality of life (QoL). The patients were randomly assigned to one of two groups, consisting of a control group (n = 47) and a therapy group (n = 47), and were followed up for 3 months. The pre-treatment and post-treatment changes among patients in the two groups were compared using their respective IPSS symptom scores, HAM-D scores, and scores on the Short Form 36 Health Survey. Following treatment, the patient IPSS symptom scores in the therapy group were significantly lower than those in the control group (10.74 ± 4.72 vs. 16.42 ± 8.09, respectively; t = 4.157, P < 0.05). Additionally, each measured dimension of QoL was significantly higher in the therapy group [total score (69.12 ± 3.92) vs. (61.30 ± 3.51), P < 0.05]. The results show antidepression medication can improve the symptoms and quality of life among elderly patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia accompanied by depression. Our findings suggest that an antidepression medication should be included when treating elderly patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Incretin Therapy for Type 2 Diabetes in Spain: 1.8 mg Liraglutide Versus Sitagliptin

OBJECTIVES

Metformin is the first-line therapy for most patients with type 2 diabetes, but the majority require treatment intensification at some stage due to the progressive nature of the disease. The 1860-LIRA-DPP-4 trial showed that liraglutide exhibited greater improvements compared with sitagliptin in glycated hemoglobin and body mass index in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin monotherapy. As a follow-up to a previously published cost-effectiveness analysis of 1.2 mg liraglutide versus sitagliptin in Spain, the aim of this analysis was to compare long-term projections of the clinical and cost implications associated with 1.8 mg liraglutide and sitagliptin.

METHODS

For the modeling analysis, 52-week treatment effect data (as opposed to 26-week data in the previous analysis) were taken from the 1860-LIRA-DPP-4 trial, for adults with type 2 diabetes receiving 1.8 mg liraglutide or 100 mg sitagliptin daily in addition to metformin. Long-term (patient lifetime) projections of clinical outcomes and direct costs (2012 EUR) were made using a published and validated model of type 2 diabetes, with modeling assumptions as per the 1.2 mg liraglutide analysis.

RESULTS

Liraglutide was associated with increased life expectancy (14.24 versus 13.87 years) and quality-adjusted life expectancy [9.24 versus 8.84 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)] over sitagliptin. Improved clinical outcomes were attributable to the improvement in glycemic control, leading to a reduced incidence of diabetes-related complications, including renal disease, cardiovascular disease, ophthalmic and diabetic foot complications. Liraglutide was associated with increased direct costs (EUR 56,628 versus EUR 52,450), driven by increased pharmacy costs. Based on these estimates, liraglutide was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of EUR 10,436 per QALY gained versus sitagliptin.

CONCLUSIONS

A previous analysis has suggested that 1.2 mg liraglutide is cost-effective from a healthcare payer perspective in Spain, and the present analysis suggests that the 1.8 mg dose is also likely to be cost-effective.