Depression-Free Day to Utility-Weighted Score

Health economic evaluation of blended collaborative care for older multimorbid heart failure patients: study protocol

BACKGROUND

Integrated care, in particular the 'Blended Collaborative Care (BCC)' strategy, may have the potential to improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in multimorbid patients with heart failure (HF) and psychosocial burden at no or low additional cost. The ESCAPE trial is a randomised controlled trial for the evaluation of a BCC approach in five European countries. For the economic evaluation of alongside this trial, the four main objectives were: (i) to document the costs of delivering the intervention, (ii) to assess the running costs across study sites, (iii) to evaluate short-term cost-effectiveness and cost-utility compared to providers' usual care, and (iv) to examine the budgetary implications.

METHODS

The trial-based economic analyses will include cross-country cost-effectiveness and cost-utility assessments from a payer perspective. The cost-utility analysis will calculate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) using the EQ-5D-5L and national value sets. Cost-effectiveness will include the cost per hospital admission avoided and the cost per depression-free days (DFD). Resource use will be measured from different sources, including electronic medical health records, standardised questionnaires, patient receipts and a care manager survey. Uncertainty will be addressed using bootstrapping.

DISCUSSION

The various methods and approaches used for data acquisition should provide insights into the potential benefits and cost-effectiveness of a BCC intervention. Providing the economic evaluation of ESCAPE will contribute to a country-based structural and organisational planning of BCC (e.g., the number of patients that may benefit, how many care managers are needed). Improved care is expected to enhance health-related quality of life at little or no extra cost.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study follows CHEERS2022 and is registered at the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00025120).

The Sub-Saharan Africa Regional Partnership (SHARP) for Mental Health Capacity-Building Scale-Up Trial: Study Design and Protocol

BACKGROUND

Depression is a leading cause of death and disability worldwide, including in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Depression often coexists with chronic medical conditions and is associated with worse clinical outcomes. This confluence has led to calls to integrate mental health treatment with chronic disease care systems in LMICs. This article describes the rationale and protocol for a trial comparing the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of two different intervention packages to implement evidence-based antidepressant management and psychotherapy into chronic noncommunicable disease (NCD) clinics in Malawi.

METHODS

Using constrained randomization, the Sub-Saharan Africa Regional Partnership (SHARP) for mental health capacity building will assign five Malawian NCD clinics to a basic implementation strategy via an internal coordinator, a provider within the chronic care clinic who champions depression services by providing training, supervision, operations, and reporting. Another five clinics will be assigned to depression services implementation via an internal coordinator along with an external quality assurance committee, which will provide a quarterly audit of intervention component delivery with feedback to providers and the health management team.

RESULTS

The authors will compare key implementation outcomes (fidelity to intervention), clinical effectiveness outcomes (patient health), and cost-effectiveness and will assess characteristics of clinics that may influence uptake and fidelity.

NEXT STEPS

This trial will provide key information to guide the Malawi Ministry of Health in scaling up depression management in existing NCD settings. The SHARP trial is anticipated to substantially contribute to enhancing both mental health treatment and implementation science research capacity in Malawi and the wider region.

Cumulative Burden of Depression and All-Cause Mortality in Women Living With Human Immunodeficiency Virus

Background

Research linking depression to mortality among people living with human immunodeficiency virus (PLWH) has largely focused on binary "always vs never" characterizations of depression. However, depression is chronic and is likely to have cumulative effects on mortality over time. Quantifying depression as a cumulative exposure may provide a better indication of the clinical benefit of enhanced depression treatment protocols delivered in HIV care settings.

Methods

Women living with HIV (WLWH), naive to antiretroviral therapy, from the Women's Interagency HIV Study were followed from their first visit in or after 1998 for up to 10 semiannual visits (5 years). Depressive symptoms were assessed using the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) scale. An area-under-the-curve approach was used to translate CES-D scores into a time-updated measure of cumulative days with depression (CDWD). We estimated the effect of CDWD on all-cause mortality using marginal structural Cox proportional hazards models.

Results

Overall, 818 women contributed 3292 woman-years over a median of 4.8 years of follow-up, during which the median (interquartile range) CDWD was 366 (97-853). Ninety-four women died during follow-up (2.9 deaths/100 woman-years). A dose-response relationship was observed between CDWD and mortality. Each additional 365 days spent with depression increased mortality risk by 72% (hazard ratio, 1.72; 95% confidence interval, 1.34-2.20).

Conclusions

In this sample of WLWH, increased CDWD elevated mortality rates in a dose-response fashion. More frequent monitoring and enhanced depression treatment protocols designed to reduce CDWD may interrupt the accumulation of mortality risk among WLWH.

Association of Increased Chronicity of Depression With HIV Appointment Attendance, Treatment Failure, and Mortality Among HIV-Infected Adults in the United States

IMPORTANCE

Depression commonly affects adults with HIV and complicates the management of HIV. Depression among individuals with HIV tends to be chronic and cyclical, but the association of this chronicity with HIV outcomes (and the related potential for screening and intervention to shorten depressive episodes) has received little attention.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association between increased chronicity of depression and multiple HIV care continuum indicators (HIV appointment attendance, treatment failure, and mortality).

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The study comprised an observational clinical cohort of 5927 patients with 2 or more assessments of depressive severity who were receiving HIV primary care at 6 geographically dispersed US academic medical centers from September 22, 2005, to August 6, 2015.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Missing a scheduled HIV primary care visit, detectable HIV RNA viral load (≥75 copies/mL), and all-cause mortality. Consecutive depressive severity measures were converted into a time-updated measure: percentage of days with depression (PDD), following established methods for determining depression-free days.

RESULTS

During 10 767 person-years of follow-up, the 5927 participants (5000 men, 926 women, and 1 intersex individual; median age, 44 years [range, 35-50 years]) had a median PDD of 14% (interquartile range, 0%-48%). During follow-up, 10 361 of 55 040 scheduled visits (18.8%) were missed, 6191 of 28 455 viral loads (21.8%) were detectable, and the mortality rate was 1.5 deaths per 100 person-years. Percentage of days with depression showed a dose-response relationship with each outcome. Each 25% increase in PDD led to an 8% increase in the risk of missing a scheduled appointment (risk ratio, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.05-1.11), a 5% increase in the risk of a detectable viral load (risk ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01-1.09), and a 19% increase in the mortality hazard (hazard ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.05-1.36). These estimates imply that, compared with patients who spent no follow-up time with depression (PDD, 0%), those who spent the entire follow-up time with depression (PDD, 100%) faced a 37% increased risk of missing appointments (risk ratio, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.22-1.53), a 23% increased risk of a detectable viral load (risk ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.06-1.43), and a doubled mortality rate (hazard ratio, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.20-3.42).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Greater chronicity of depression increased the likelihood of failure at multiple points along the HIV care continuum. Even modest increases in the proportion of time spent with depression led to clinically meaningful increases in negative outcomes. Clinic-level trials of protocols to promptly identify and appropriately treat depression among adults living with HIV should be conducted to understand the effect of such protocols on shortening the course and preventing the recurrence of depressive illness and improving clinical outcomes.

The effect of antidepressant treatment on HIV and depression outcomes: results from a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Depression is a major barrier to HIV treatment outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To test whether antidepressant management decision support integrated into HIV care improves antiretroviral adherence and depression morbidity.

DESIGN

Pseudo-cluster randomized trial.

SETTING

Four US infectious diseases clinics.

PARTICIPANTS

HIV-infected adults with major depressive disorder.

INTERVENTION

Measurement-based care (MBC) - depression care managers used systematic metrics to give HIV primary-care clinicians standardized antidepressant treatment recommendations.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary - antiretroviral medication adherence (monthly unannounced telephone-based pill counts for 12 months). Primary time-point - 6 months. Secondary - depressive severity, depression remission, depression-free days, measured quarterly for 12 months.

RESULTS

From 2010 to 2013, 149 participants were randomized to intervention and 155 to usual care. Participants were mostly men, Black, non-Hispanic, unemployed, and virally suppressed with high baseline self-reported antiretroviral adherence and depressive severity. Over follow-up, no differences between arms in antiretroviral adherence or other HIV outcomes were apparent. At 6 months, depressive severity was lower among intervention participants than usual care [mean difference -3.7, 95% confidence interval (CI) -5.6, -1.7], probability of depression remission was higher [risk difference 13%, 95% CI 1%, 25%), and suicidal ideation was lower (risk difference -18%, 95% CI -30%, -6%). By 12 months, the arms had comparable mental health outcomes. Intervention arm participants experienced an average of 29 (95% CI: 1-57) more depression-free days over 12 months.

CONCLUSION

In the largest trial of its kind among HIV-infected adults, MBC did not improve HIV outcomes, possibly because of high baseline adherence, but achieved clinically significant depression improvements and increased depression-free days. MBC may be an effective, resource-efficient approach to reducing depression morbidity among HIV patients.

Cost-effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia comorbid with depression: Analysis of a randomized controlled trial

AIM

Although the efficacy of cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia has been confirmed, dissemination depends on the balance of benefits and costs. This study aimed to examine the cost-effectiveness of cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia consisting of four weekly individual sessions.

METHODS

We conducted a 4-week randomized controlled trial with a 4-week follow up in outpatient clinics in Japan. Thirty-seven patients diagnosed as having major depressive disorder according to DSM-IV and suffering from chronic insomnia were randomized to receive either treatment as usual (TAU) alone or TAU plus cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia. Effectiveness was evaluated as quality-adjusted life years (QALY) over 8 weeks' time, estimated by bootstrapping of the observed total scores of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. Direct medical costs for cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia and TAU were also evaluated. We calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio.

RESULTS

Over the 8 weeks of the study, the group receiving cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia plus TAU had significantly higher QALY (P = 0.002) than the TAU-alone group with an incremental value of 0.019 (SD 0.006), and had non-significantly higher costs with an incremental value of 254 (SD 203) USD in direct costs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was 13 678 USD (95% confidence interval: -5691 to 71 316). Adding cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia demonstrated an approximately 95% chance of gaining one more QALY if a decision-maker was willing to pay 60 000 USD, and approximately 90% for 40 000 USD.

CONCLUSION

Adding cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia is highly likely to be cost-effective for patients with residual insomnia and concomitant depression.

Population-level cost-effectiveness of implementing evidence-based practices into routine care

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this research was to apply a new methodology (population-level cost-effectiveness analysis) to determine the value of implementing an evidence-based practice in routine care.

DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING

Data are from sequentially conducted studies: a randomized controlled trial and an implementation trial of collaborative care for depression. Both trials were conducted in the same practice setting and population (primary care patients prescribed antidepressants).

STUDY DESIGN

The study combined results from a randomized controlled trial and a pre-post-quasi-experimental implementation trial.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

The randomized controlled trial collected quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) from survey and medication possession ratios (MPRs) from administrative data. The implementation trial collected MPRs and intervention costs from administrative data and implementation costs from survey.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

In the randomized controlled trial, MPRs were significantly correlated with QALYs (p = .03). In the implementation trial, patients at implementation sites had significantly higher MPRs (p = .01) than patients at control sites, and by extrapolation higher QALYs (0.00188). Total costs (implementation, intervention) were nonsignificantly higher ($63.76) at implementation sites. The incremental population-level cost-effectiveness ratio was $33,905.92/QALY (bootstrap interquartile range -$45,343.10/QALY to $99,260.90/QALY).

CONCLUSIONS

The methodology was feasible to operationalize and gave reasonable estimates of implementation value.

The cost-effectiveness of depression treatment for co-occurring disorders: a clinical trial

The authors aimed to determine the economic value of providing on-site group cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for depression to clients receiving residential substance use disorder (SUD) treatment. Using a quasi-experimental design and an intention-to-treat analysis, the incremental cost-effectiveness and cost-utility ratio of the intervention were estimated relative to usual care residential treatment. The average cost of a treatment episode was $908, compared to $180 for usual care. The incremental cost effectiveness ratio was $131 for each point improvement of the BDI-II and $49 for each additional depression-free day. The incremental cost-utility ratio ranged from $9,249 to $17,834 for each additional quality adjusted life year. Although the intervention costs substantially more than usual care, the cost effectiveness and cost-utility ratios compare favorably to other depression interventions. Health care reform should promote dissemination of group CBT to individuals with depression in residential SUD treatment.

Cost-effectiveness of depression case management in small practices

BACKGROUND

Case management undertaken by healthcare assistants in small primary care practices is effective in improving depression symptoms and adherence in patients with major depression.

AIMS

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of depression case management by healthcare assistants in small primary care practices.

METHOD

Cost-effectiveness analysis on the basis of a pragmatic randomised controlled trial (2005-2008): practice-based healthcare assistants in 74 practices provided case management to 562 patients with major depression over 1 year. Our primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) calculated as the ratio of differences in mean costs and mean number of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Our secondary outcome was the mean depression-free days (DFDs) between the intervention and control group at 24-month follow-up. The study was registered at the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Registry: ISRCTN66386086.

RESULTS

Intervention v. control group: no significant difference in QALYs; significantly more DFDs (mean: 373 v. 311, P<0.01); no significant difference in mean direct healthcare costs (€4495 v. €3506, P = 0.16); considerably lower mean indirect costs (€5228 v. €7539, P = 0.06), resulting in lower total costs (€9723 v. €11 045, P = 0.41). The point estimate for the cost-utility ratio was €38 429 per QALY gained if only direct costs were considered, and 'dominance' of the intervention if total costs were considered. Yet, regardless of decision makers' willingness to pay per QALY, the probability of the intervention being cost-effective was never above 90%.

CONCLUSIONS

In small primary care practices, 1 year of case management did not increase the number of QALYs but it did increase the number of DFDs. The intervention was likely to be cost-effective.

Cost-effectiveness of a novel e-health depression service

OBJECTIVES

A recent trial assessed feasibility of an e-health service (" Improvehealth.eu ") to support depression care and reported positive outcomes. Our objective was to examine cost-effectiveness of the Improvehealth.eu service. A baseline model was used to evaluate cost and effects of the intervention. Given the high uncertainty in the input space, a series of alternative scenarios were evaluated to challenge the result. The aim was to find if conservative or even pessimistic estimates and assumptions could result in a change of the cost-effectiveness from the baseline model.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A probabilistic depression model combined with bootstrapping was built and populated with data from the literature and from the pilot efficacy trial of the e-health service. The core of the model was a stochastic mapping function that translated depression-specific outcomes to quality-adjusted life years. Correlated sampling was used to obtain unbiased and consistent piecewise linear transformation of Beck Depression Inventory scores to utilities. The results are shown as cost-effectiveness acceptability curves with value of information data. An extreme scenario analysis was then performed to deal with parameter, structural, and modeling uncertainty.

RESULTS

Cost-effectiveness of the e-health service was favorable because of low cost and high efficacy of the intervention. Apart from the most pessimistic one, none of the 13 alternative scenarios changed the preferred alternative.

CONCLUSIONS

Improvehealth.eu is cost-effective relative to usual care, given the available efficacy data. Results of the health economic evaluation were robust to alternative assumptions, despite considerable uncertainty in input data.

Cost-effectiveness of family psychoeducation to prevent relapse in major depression: results from a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Family psychoeducation is a relatively simple and straightforward intervention whose prophylactic effectiveness and cost-effectiveness is well-established for schizophrenia. We have recently demonstrated its effectiveness for unipolar depression, but its cost-effectiveness has never been examined. We hereby report a cost-effectiveness analysis alongside a randomized controlled trial in order to assess its cost-effectiveness for preventing relapse/recurrence in depression.

METHODS

Fifty-seven patients diagnosed with major depression and undergoing its maintenance treatment, and their primary family members were randomized to treatment as usual (TAU) only or to TAU plus family psychoeducation, which consisted of four 2-hour multiple-family sessions consisting of didactic lectures about depression (30 minutes) and group discussion and problem solving (60-90 minutes). The economic analyses were undertaken from the perspective of the National Health Insurance (NHI), assuming the most reasonable price of US$50 per psychoeducation session per patient. The main outcome measures included relapse-free days and direct costs to the NHI.

RESULTS

The intervention group enjoyed 272 (SD: 7.1) relapse-free days, while the control group spent 214 (SD: 90.8) relapse-free days (Cox proportional hazard ratio=0.17, 95%CI: 0.04 to 0.75, p=0.002). Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves suggested that the family psychoeducation has 90% or more chances of being cost-effective if the decision-maker is prepared to pay US$20 for one additional relapse-free day. This cost-effectiveness finding was robust when the price for family psychoeducation ranged between 50% to 150% of the baseline scenario in sensitivity analyses. If a relapse-free day is considered to be worth $30 or more, all the pricing scenarios have a close to 100% probability of being cost-effective.

CONCLUSION

Family psychoeducation is effective in the relapse prevention of depression and is highly likely to be cost-effective if a relapse-free day is valued as US$20 or more.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN-CTR (UMIN000005555).

The responsiveness of quality of life utilities to change in depression: a comparison of instruments (SF-6D, EQ-5D, and DFD)

BACKGROUND

Utilities are often a main outcome parameter in economic evaluations. Because depression has a large influence on quality of life, it is expected that utilities are responsive to changes in depression.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the change in utility derived from different instruments in depression, including the Short Form 6D (SF-6D), the Euroqol based on the UK (EQ-5D(UK)), the Euroqol based on the Dutch tariff (EQ-5D(NL)), and utilities derived from Beck Depression Inventory Second Edition (BDI-II) using the Depression-Free-Day method.

METHOD

This study evaluated the responsiveness, the minimally important difference, and the agreement in utility change derived from the different instruments.

RESULTS

The SF-6D, EQ-5D(UK), and EQ-5D(NL) were responsive. The minimally important difference values are in line with previous studies, about 0.3. The Depression-Free-Day method nearly always resulted in positive utility changes, even for subgroups that had no change or deterioration in health status or depression. There was poor agreement between utility changes of the SF-6D, EQ-5D (either EQ-5D(UK) or EQ-5D(NL)), and DFDu.

CONCLUSIONS

The SF-6D, EQ-5D(UK), and EQ-5D(NL) seem responsive and thus adequate for estimating utility in depression treatment. We do not recommend the use of the Depression-Fee-Day method. The low agreement between utility changes indicates that outcomes of the different instruments are incomparable.

Incremental cost-effectiveness of combined therapy vs medication only for youth with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor-resistant depression: treatment of SSRI-resistant depression in adolescents trial findings

CONTEXT

Many youth with depression do not respond to initial treatment with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), and this is associated with higher costs. More effective treatment for these youth may be cost-effective.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the incremental cost-effectiveness over 24 weeks of combined cognitive behavior therapy plus switch to a different antidepressant medication vs medication switch only in adolescents who continued to have depression despite adequate initial treatment with an SSRI.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Six US academic and community clinics.

PATIENTS

Three hundred thirty-four patients aged 12 to 18 years with SSRI-resistant depression.

INTERVENTION

Participants were randomly assigned to (1) switch to a different medication only or (2) switch to a different medication plus cognitive behavior therapy.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Clinical outcomes were depression-free days (DFDs), depression-improvement days (DIDs), and quality-adjusted life-years based on DFDs (DFD-QALYs). Costs of intervention, nonprotocol services, and families were included.

RESULTS

Combined treatment achieved 8.3 additional DFDs (P = .03), 0.020 more DFD-QALYs (P = .03), and 11.0 more DIDs (P = .04). Combined therapy cost $1633 more (P = .01). Cost per DFD was $188 (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio [ICER] = $188; 95% confidence interval [CI], -$22 to $1613), $142 per DID (ICER = $142; 95% CI, -$14 to $2529), and $78,948 per DFD-QALY (ICER = $78,948; 95% CI, -$9261 to $677,448). Cost-effectiveness acceptability curve analyses suggest a 61% probability that combined treatment is more cost-effective at a willingness to pay $100,000 per QALY. Combined treatment had a higher net benefit for subgroups of youth without a history of abuse, with lower levels of hopelessness, and with comorbid conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

For youth with SSRI-resistant depression, combined treatment decreases the number of days with depression and is more costly. Depending on a decision maker's willingness to pay, combined therapy may be cost-effective, particularly for some subgroups.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00018902.

Advantages of using estimated depression-free days for evaluating treatment efficacy

OBJECTIVE

Several common methods for measuring treatment response present a snapshot of depression symptoms. The construct of estimated depression-free days (DFDs) simultaneously captures treatment outcome and estimates the patient's experience of depression over time. The study compared this measure with traditional measures used in depression treatment research.

METHODS

This secondary data analysis was based on data from the Improving Mood-Promoting Access to Collaborative Treatment trial, a multisite depression treatment study conducted in 18 primary care clinics in five states and representing eight health care systems. The sample of older adults (N=906) had been randomly assigned to receive collaborative care for depression. Participants were aged 60 or older and met criteria for major depressive disorder, dysthymia, or both. Exclusion criteria included severe cognitive impairment, active substance abuse, active suicidal behavior, severe mental illness, and active treatment from a psychiatrist. The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and the Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL-20) were used as outcome measures at four assessment points (baseline, three months, six months, and 12 months). Outcomes were computed for relative change, standardized differences, the proportion of improvement in depression, and DFDs.

RESULTS

Using four assessment points improved the agreement between DFDs and the course of symptom change between pre- and posttest measures.

CONCLUSIONS

The DFD is a valid measure for estimating treatment outcomes that reflects the course of symptom change over time. When multiple assessments were conducted between the pre- and posttest periods, DFDs incorporated additional data yet remained easily interpreted. The DFD should be considered for reporting outcomes in depression research.

Economic evaluation of a minimal psychological intervention in chronically ill elderly patients with minor or mild to moderate depression: A randomized trial (the DELTA-study)

Objectives: Depression is associated with high healthcare utilization and related costs. Effective treatments might reduce the economic burden. The objective of this study was to establish the cost-utility of a minimal psychological intervention (MPI) aimed at reducing depression and improving quality of life in elderly persons with diabetes or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and co-occurring minor, mild, or moderate depression.

Methods: Trial-based cost-utility analysis was used to compare the MPI with usual care. Annual costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) based on the Euroqol (EQ5D) and on depression-free days were calculated.

Results: Annual costs and effects were not significantly different for the MPI group and care as usual. Bootstrap analysis indicated a dominant intervention, with a probability of 63 percent that the MPI is less costly and more effective than usual care.

Conclusions: The cost-effectiveness analysis does not support dissemination of the MPI in its current form. The economic evaluation study showed limited probability that MPI is cost-effective over usual care. Further adjustments to the MPI are needed to make the intervention suitable for dissemination in regular care. Trial registration: isrctn.org, identifier: ISRCTN92331982.

Relative cost-effectiveness of treatments for adolescent depression: 36-week results from the TADS randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

The cost-effectiveness of three active interventions for major depression in adolescents was compared after 36 weeks of treatment in the Treatment of Adolescents with Depression Study.

METHOD

Outpatients aged 12 to 18 years with a primary diagnosis of major depression participated in a randomized controlled trial conducted at 13 U.S. academic and community clinics from 2000 to 2004. Three hundred twenty-seven participants randomized to 1 of 3 active treatment arms, fluoxetine alone (n = 109), cognitive-behavioral therapy (n = 111) alone, or their combination (n = 107), were evaluated for a 3-month acute treatment and a 6-month continuation/maintenance treatment period. Costs of services received for the 36 weeks were estimated and examined in relation to the number of depression-free days and quality-adjusted life-years. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were also generated. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess treatment differences on the quality-adjusted life-years and cost-effectiveness measures.

RESULTS

Cognitive-behavioral therapy was the most costly treatment component (mean $1,787 [in monotherapy] and $1,833 [in combination therapy], median $1,923 [for both]). Reflecting higher direct and indirect costs associated with psychiatric hospital use, the costs of services received outside Treatment of Adolescents with Depression Study in fluoxetine-treated patients (mean $5,382, median $2,341) were significantly higher than those in participants treated with cognitive-behavioral therapy (mean $3,102, median $1,373) or combination (mean $2,705, median $927). Accordingly, cost-effectiveness acceptability curves indicate that combination treatment is highly likely (>90%) to be more cost-effective than fluoxetine alone at 36 weeks. Cognitive-behavioral therapy is not likely to be more cost-effective than fluoxetine.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings support the use of combination treatment in adolescents with depression over monotherapy.

Nonresponse, partial response, and failure to achieve remission: humanistic and cost burden in major depressive disorder

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the spectrum of clinical outcomes achieved with depression treatment and the associated impact on quality of life (QOL), functional status, overall well-being, health-care costs, and productivity.

SOURCES

Electronic databases including Medline were searched for English language sources between 1995 and 2007 using key words of depression, nonresponse, partial response, and remission and QOL, functional status, utility, cost, and productivity.

STUDY SELECTION

Relevant abstracts were obtained for 488 references and full-text articles were reviewed that included primary data and compared outcomes by treatment response. Data were abstracted from 26 full-text articles.

DATA ABSTRACTION

Detailed evidence tables were prepared with the relevant data as well as information on the study design. All data abstracted were checked for accuracy. synthesis: Treatment remitters and partial responders reported clinically and statistically significant improvements in QOL, functional status, and overall well-being compared to nonresponders. Annual health-care costs and productivity losses were significantly lower for remitters and partial responders compared to nonresponders.

CONCLUSIONS

The reduced disease burden for remitters and partial responders compared to nonresponders indicates that new treatment strategies that improve the rates of response/remission with initial treatment might have value to patients and to society.

How bad is depression? Preference score estimates from depressed patients and the general population

OBJECTIVE

To compare depression health state preference scores across four groups: (1) general population, (2) previous history of depression but not currently depressed, (3) less severe current depression, and (4) more severe current depression.

DATA SOURCES

Primary data were collected from 95 general population, 163 primary care, and 83 specialty mental health subjects.

STUDY DESIGN

Stratified sampling frames were used to recruit general population and patient subjects. Subjects completed cross-sectional surveys. Key variables included rating scale and standard gamble scores assigned to depression health state descriptions developed from the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) and SF-12.

DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS

Each subject completed an in-person interview. Forty-nine subjects completed test/retest reliability interviews.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Depressed patient preference scores for three of six SF-12 depression health states were significantly lower than the general population using the rating scale and two of six were significantly lower using standard gamble. Depressed patient scores for five of six PHQ-9 depression health states were significantly lower than the general population using the rating scale and two of six were significantly lower using standard gamble.

CONCLUSIONS

Depressed patients report lower preference scores for depression health states than the general population. In effect, they perceived depression to be worse than the general public perceived it to be. Additional research is needed to examine the implications for cost-effectiveness ratios using general population preference scores versus depressed patient preference scores.

Effectiveness of problem-solving therapy for older, primary care patients with depression: results from the IMPACT project

PURPOSE

We compared a primary-care-based psychotherapy, that is, problem-solving therapy for primary care (PST-PC), to community-based psychotherapy in treating late-life major depression and dysthymia.

DESIGN AND METHODS

The data here are from the IMPACT study, which compared collaborative care within a primary care clinic to care as usual in the treatment of 1,801 primary care patients, 60 years of age or older, with major depression or dysthymia. This study is a secondary data analysis (n = 433) of participants who received either PST-PC (by means of collaborative care) or community-based psychotherapy (by means of usual care).

RESULTS

Older adults who received PST-PC had more depression-free days at both 12 and between 12 and 24 months (beta = 47.5, p <.001; beta = 47.0, p <.001), and they had fewer depressive symptoms and better functioning at 12 months (beta(dep) = -0.36, p <.001; beta(func) = -0.94, p <.001), than those who received community-based psychotherapy. We found no differences at 24 months.

IMPLICATIONS

Results suggest that PST-PC as delivered in primary care settings is an effective method for treating late-life depression.