Cost-effectiveness of telehealth for patients with depression: evidence from the Healthlines randomised controlled trial

The Resilience Hub approach for addressing mental health of health and social care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-methods evaluation

Background

Resilience Hubs provide mental health screening, facilitation of access and direct provision of psychosocial support for health and social care keyworkers in England affected by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

Aim

To explore implementation of the Hubs, including characteristics of staff using the services, support accessed, costing data and a range of stakeholder perspectives on the barriers and enablers to Hub use and implementation of staff well-being support within the context of the pandemic.

Design

Mixed-methods evaluation.

Setting

Four Resilience Hubs.

Methods

Findings were integrated via mixed-method case studies, including: analyses of Hub mental health screening (N = 1973); follow-up questionnaire data (N = 299) on service use and health status of Hub clients; economic information provided by the Hubs; 63 interviews with Hub staff, wider stakeholders, Hub clients and keyworkers who did not use the Hubs.

Results

Findings were consistent across Hubs and workstreams. Most Hub clients were NHS staff. Under-represented groups included men, keyworkers from minority ethnic communities, care homes and emergency services staff. Clients reported comorbid mental health needs across multiple domains (anxiety; depression; post-traumatic stress; alcohol use; functioning). Their health status was lower than population norms and relevant pre-pandemic data. Several factors predicted higher needs, but having pre-pandemic emotional well-being concerns was one of the most robust predictors of higher need. Sixty per cent of participants who completed follow-up questionnaires reported receiving mental health support since Hub screening, most of which was directly or indirectly due to Hub support. High levels of satisfaction were reported. As in many services, staffing was the central component of Hub cost. Hubs were predominantly staffed by senior clinicians; this staffing model was consistent with the generally severe difficulties experienced by clients and the need for systemic/team-based working. Costs associated with health and social care use for Hub clients were low, which may be due to barriers to accessing support in general. Enablers to accessing Hubs included: a clear understanding of the Hubs, how to self-refer, and managerial support. Barriers included confusion between Hubs and other support; unhelpful beliefs about job roles, unsupportive managers, negative workplace cultures and difficulties caused by systemic issues. Some keyworkers highlighted a perceived need for further diversity and cultural competency training to improve reach to under-represented communities. Other barriers for these groups included prior negative experiences of services, structural inequalities and stigma. Some wider stakeholders had concerns around growing waiting times for Hub-provided therapy, and insufficient data on Hub usage and outcomes. Feedback was otherwise very positive.

Limitations

Main limitations included lack of comparative and pre-pandemic/baseline data, small numbers from under-represented groups limiting fine-grained analysis, and participant self-selection.

Conclusions

Findings highlighted the value of the Hub model of outreach, screening, support navigation and provision of direct support during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, and as a potential model to respond to future crises. The research provided recommendations to improve Hub promotion, equality/diversity/inclusion access issues, management of specialist resources and collection of relevant data on Hub outcomes and activities. Broader recommendations for the primary prevention of mental health difficulties across the health and care system are made, as individual support offers should be an adjunct to, not a replacement for, resolutions to systemic challenges. Research recommendations are made to conduct more robust evaluations of the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the Hubs, using larger data sets and comparative data.

Study registration

This study is registered as researchregistry6303.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR132269) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 29. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Cost-effectiveness of Internet Interventions Compared With Treatment as Usual for People With Mental Disorders: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

The economic costs of mental disorders for society are huge. Internet-based interventions are often coined as cost-effective alternatives to usual care, but the evidence is mixed.

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to review the literature on the cost-effectiveness of internet interventions for mental disorders compared with usual care and to provide an estimate of the monetary benefits of such interventions compared with usual care.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was conducted, which included participants with symptoms of mental disorders; investigated a telephone- or internet-based intervention; included a control condition in the form of treatment as usual, psychological placebo, waiting list control, or bibliotherapy; reported outcomes on both quality of life and costs; and included articles published in English. Electronic databases such as PubMed (including MEDLINE), Embase, Emcare, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were used. Data on risk of bias, quality of the economic evaluation, quality-adjusted life years, and costs were extracted from the included studies, and the incremental net benefit was calculated and pooled.

RESULTS

The search yielded 6226 abstracts, and 37 studies with 14,946 participants were included. The quality of economic evaluations of the included studies was rated as moderate, and the risk of bias was high. A random-effects approach was maintained. Analyses suggested internet interventions were slightly more effective than usual care in terms of quality-adjusted life years gain (Hedges g=0.052, 95% CI 0.010-0.094; P=.02) and equally expensive (Hedges g=0.002, 95% CI -0.080 to 0.84; P=.96). The pooled incremental net benefit was US $255 (95% CI US $91 to US $419; P=.002), favoring internet interventions over usual care. The perspective of the economic evaluation and targeted mental disorder moderated the results.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings indicate that the cost-effectiveness of internet interventions for mental disorders compared with a care-as-usual approach is likely, but generalizability to new studies is poor given the substantial heterogeneity. This is the first study in the field of mental health to pool cost-effectiveness outcomes in an aggregate data meta-analysis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019141659; https://tinyurl.com/3cu99b34.

A Telehealth and Telepsychiatry Economic Cost Analysis Framework: Scoping Review

Introduction: Despite a good evidence base for telepsychiatry (TP), economic cost analyses are infrequent and vary in quality. Methods: A scoping review was conducted based on the research question, "From the perspective of an economic cost analysis for telehealth and telepsychiatry, what are the most meaningful ways to ensure a study/intervention improved clinical care, provided value to participants, had population level impact, and is sustainable?" The search in seven databases focused on keywords in four concept areas: (1) economic cost analysis, (2) evaluation, (3) telehealth and telepsychiatry, and (4) quantifiable health status outcomes. The authors reviewed the full-text articles based on the inclusion (Medical Subject Headings [MeSH] of the keywords) and exclusion criteria. Results: Of a total of 2,585 potential references, a total of 99 articles met the inclusion criteria. The evaluation of telehealth and TP has focused on access, quality, patient outcomes, feasibility, effectiveness, outcomes, and cost. Cost-effectiveness, cost-benefit, and other analytic models are more common with telehealth than TP studies, and these studies show favorable clinical, quality of life, and economic impact. A standard framework for economic cost analysis should include: an economist for planning, implementation, and evaluation; a tool kit or guideline; comprehensive analysis (e.g., cost-effectiveness or cost-benefit) with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio; measures for health, quality of life, and utility outcomes for populations; methods to convert outcomes into economic benefits (e.g., monetary, quality of adjusted life year); broad perspective (e.g., societal perspective); sensitivity analysis for uncertainty in modeling; and adjustments for differential timing (e.g., discounting and future costs). Conclusions: Technology assessment and economic cost analysis-such as effectiveness and implementation science approaches-contribute to clinical, training, research, and other organizational missions. More research is needed with a framework that enables comparisons across studies and meta-analyses.

The Use of Telehealth in Depression Treatment during the Crisis Caused by COVID-19

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been increased interest in telehealth as a means of providing care for depression. In this article, we provide an overview of telehealth utilization for the treatment of depression and provide some insight into the rapid shift made to quickly implement these telehealth services into our everyday practices due to COVID-19 personal distancing requirements. We review the application of telehealth in the treatment of depression during the COVID-19 pandemic. The multiple advantages and disadvantages of telehealth in treatment of depression are summarized through the literature, and we analyze the methods to improve the effect and quality of telehealth in depression treatment. It has been highlighted in the current research that against its proven capacity for convenience, its relative cheapness, and its ability to overcome geographic barriers, telehealth has its own shortfalls, including disparities in rural-urban infrastructure and an alleged inability to be exhaustive when intensive interventions are needed. Recommendations for the improvement of telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic also presuppose that it is infrastructure and human resource intensive and that short-term improvements in its efficiency are largely dependent on the creativity and resourcefulness of physicians to provide custom solutions for patients.

Considering the societal perspective in economic evaluations: a systematic review in the case of depression

BACKGROUND

Depressive disorders are associated with a high burden of disease. However, due to the burden posed by the disease on not only the sufferers, but also on their relatives, there is an ongoing debate about which costs to include and, hence, which perspective should be applied. Therefore, the aim of this paper was to examine whether the change between healthcare payer and societal perspective leads to different conclusions of cost-utility analyses in the case of depression.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted to identify economic evaluations of interventions in depression, launched on Medline and the Cost-Effectiveness Registry of the Tufts University using a ten-year time horizon (2008-2018). In a two-stepped screening process, cost-utility studies were selected by means of specified inclusion and exclusion criteria. Subsequently, relevant findings was extracted and, if not fully stated, calculated by the authors of this work.

RESULTS

Overall, 53 articles with 92 complete economic evaluations, reporting costs from healthcare payer/provider and societal perspective, were identified. More precisely, 22 estimations (24%) changed their results regarding the cost-effectiveness quadrant when the societal perspective was included. Furthermore, 5% of the ICURs resulted in cost-effectiveness regarding the chosen threshold (2% of them became dominant) when societal costs were included. However, another four estimations (4%) showed the opposite result: these interventions were no longer cost-effective after the inclusion of societal costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Summarising the disparities in results and applied methods, the results show that societal costs might alter the conclusions in cost-utility analyses. Hence, the relevance of the perspectives chosen should be taken into account when carrying out an economic evaluation. This systematic review demonstrates that the results of economic evaluations can be affected by different methods available for estimating non-healthcare costs.

Cost-Effectiveness of Sertraline in Primary Care According to Initial Severity and Duration of Depressive Symptoms: Findings from the PANDA RCT

BACKGROUND

Antidepressants are commonly prescribed for depression, but it is unclear whether treatment efficacy depends on severity and duration of symptoms and how prescribing might be targeted cost-effectively.

OBJECTIVES

We investigated the cost-effectiveness of the antidepressant sertraline compared with placebo in subgroups defined by severity and duration of depressive symptoms.

METHODS

We undertook a cost-effectiveness analysis from the perspective of the NHS and Personal and Social Services (PSS) in the UK alongside the PANDA (What are the indications for Prescribing ANtiDepressants that will leAd to a clinical benefit?) randomised controlled trial (RCT), which compared sertraline with placebo over a 12-week period. Quality of life data were collected at baseline and at 2, 6, and 12 weeks post-randomisation using EQ-5D-5L, from which we calculated quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs (in 2017/18£) were collected using patient records and from resource use questionnaires administered at each follow-up interval. Differences in mean costs and mean QALYs and net monetary benefits were estimated. Our primary analysis used net monetary benefit regressions to identify any interaction between the cost-effectiveness of sertraline and subgroups defined by baseline symptom severity (0-11; 12-19; 20+ on the Clinical Interview Schedule-Revised) and, separately, duration of symptoms (greater or less than 2 years duration). A secondary analysis estimated the cost-effectiveness of sertraline versus placebo, irrespective of duration or severity.

RESULTS

There was no evidence of an association between the baseline severity of depressive symptoms and the cost-effectiveness of sertraline. Compared to patients with low symptom severity, the expected net benefits in patients with moderate symptoms were £24 (95% CI - £280 to £328; p value 0.876) and the expected net benefits in patients with high symptom severity were £37 (95% CI - £221 to £296; p value 0.776). Patients who had a longer history of depressive symptoms at baseline had lower expected net benefits from sertraline than those with a shorter history; however, the difference was uncertain (- £27 [95% CI - £258 to £204]; p value 0.817). In the secondary analysis, patients treated with sertraline had higher expected net benefits (£122 [95% CI £18 to £226]; p value 0.101) than those in the placebo group. Sertraline had a high probability (> 95%) of being cost-effective if the health system was willing to pay at least £20,000 per QALY gained.

CONCLUSIONS

We found insufficient evidence of a prespecified threshold based on severity or symptom duration that GPs could use to target prescribing to a subgroup of patients where sertraline is most cost-effective. Sertraline is probably a cost-effective treatment for depressive symptoms in UK primary care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Controlled Trials ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN84544741.

Effect of nurse-led home-based biofeedback intervention on the blood pressure levels among patients with hypertension: Pretest-posttest study

AIM

To investigate the effect of nurse-led home-based biofeedback intervention on the blood pressure levels among patients with hypertension.

BACKGROUND

Nurse-led interventions are emerging as cost-effective as well as clinically proven in chronic illness management. Hypertension, a leading long-term cardiovascular condition, has autonomic dysregulation and increased sympathetic tone as its pathophysiological background. Complementary interventions evidenced to interplay hypertension pathophysiology.

DESIGN

A pretest-posttest design.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Uncomplicated primary hypertension outpatients were randomly assigned as study group (n = 173) and control group (n = 173) at a tertiary care hospital. Sociodemographic, clinical, and outcome variables [the baseline blood pressure and galvanic skin response (GSR)] were collected. Study group patients were given four teaching sessions of abdominal breathing-assisted relaxation facilitated by GSR biofeedback. Daily home practice was encouraged and monitored to measure the effects on blood pressure and GSR at the end of the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd month of intervention.

RESULTS

The study group participants showed significant decrease in mean (SD) systolic [140.77 (8.31) to 136.93 (7.96), F = 469.08] and diastolic blood pressure [88.24 (5.42) to 85.77 (4.66), F = 208.21]. In contrast, control group participants had a mild increase in the mean systolic (F = 6.02) and diastolic blood pressure (F = 4.70) values from pretest to posttests. GSR showed a significant increase from 559.63 (226.33) to 615.03 (232.24), (F = 80.21) from pretest to posttest III.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of home-based biofeedback-centered behavioral interventions enabled BP reduction among hypertensive patients. Further studies should use biochemical markers of sympathetic nervous system activity to endorse this home-based chronic illness intervention.

Virtual Savings: Patient-Reported Time and Money Savings from a VA National Telehealth Tablet Initiative

Virtual care holds promise for offering services to Veterans Affairs (VA) patients who have barriers to accessing care. In 2016, the VA began issuing video-enabled tablets to Veterans with geographic, clinical, and/or social barriers to in-person care. To complement a national evaluation of system-level implementation and effectiveness of these tablets, we sought to understand whether the VA-issued tablets generated money and/or time savings for patients. We distributed a survey to 2,120 Veterans who received tablets and administered a follow-up survey 3-6 months later. The final analysis included 594 and 399 patients who responded to questions about money and time savings, respectively. We used poststratification survey weighting methods to address potential selection and nonresponse bias. In multinomial logistic regressions and logistic regressions, we examined patient characteristics associated with reported money and time savings. A majority of survey respondents reported that the tablets saved them money (89%) and time (71%). Respondents were more likely to report monetary savings if they lived at a greater distance from the VA, if they experienced travel barriers, and if they did not have a mental health condition. Respondents were more likely to report time savings if they were <45 or ≥65 years of age, employed, and reported more overall technology experience. Findings may inform policy decisions regarding patient targeting and training as VA aims to expand its use of video telehealth technology.

Comparison of telemedicine with in-person care for follow-up after elective neurosurgery: results of a cost-effectiveness analysis of 1200 patients using patient-perceived utility scores

OBJECTIVE The utility of telemedicine (TM) in neurosurgery is underexplored, with most of the studies relating to teletrauma or telestroke programs. In this study, the authors evaluate the cost-effectiveness of TM consultations for follow-up care of a large population of patients who underwent neurosurgical procedures. METHODS A decision-analytical model was used to assess the cost-effectiveness of TM for elective post-neurosurgical care patients from a predominantly nonurban cohort in West Bengal, India. The model compared TM care via a nodal center in West Bengal to routine, in-person, per-episode care at the provider site in Bangalore, India. Cost and effectiveness data relating to 1200 patients were collected for a 52-month period. The effectiveness of TM care was calculated using efficiency in terms of the percentage of successful TM consultations, as well as patient-perceived utility values for overall experience of the type of health care access that they received. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) analysis was done using the 4-quadrant charting of the cost-effectiveness plane. One-way sensitivity and tornado analyses were performed to identify thresholds where the care strategy would change. RESULTS The overall utility for the 3 TM scenarios was found to be higher (89%) than for the utility of routine care (80%). TM was found to be more cost-effective (Indian rupee [INR] 2630 per patient) compared to routine care (INR 6848 per patient). The TM strategy "dominates" that of routine care by being more effective and less expensive (ICER value of -39,400 INR/unit of effectiveness). Sensitivity analysis revealed that cost-effectiveness of TM was most sensitive to changes in the number of TM patients, utility and success rate of TM, and travel distance to the TM center. CONCLUSIONS TM care dominates the in-person care strategy by providing more effective and less expensive follow-up care for a remote post-neurosurgical care population in India. In the authors' setting, this benefit of TM is sustainable even if half the TM consultations turn out to be unsuccessful. The viability of TM as a cost-effective care protocol is attributed to a combination of factors, like an adequate patient volume utilizing TM, patient utility, success rate of TM, and the patient travel distance.

Peer approaches to self-management (PALS): comparing a peer mentoring approach for disease self-management in African American women with lupus with a social support control: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE or lupus) is a chronic autoimmune disease that is associated with increased morbidity, mortality, healthcare costs and decreased quality of life. African Americans in the USA have three to four times greater prevalence of SLE, risk of developing SLE at an earlier age, and SLE-related disease activity, damage, and mortality compared with Caucasians, with the highest rates experienced by African American women. There is strong evidence that patient-level factors are associated with outcomes, which justifies targeting them with intervention. While evidence-based self-management interventions that incorporate both social support and health education have reduced pain, improved function, and delayed disability among patients with SLE, African Americans and women are still disproportionately impacted by SLE. Peer mentoring interventions are effective in other chronic conditions that disproportionately affect minorities, such as diabetes mellitus, HIV, and kidney disease, but there is currently no empirically tested peer mentoring intervention developed for patients with SLE. Preliminary data from our group suggest that peer mentoring improves self-management, reduces disease activity, and improves health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in African American women with SLE.

METHODS

This study will test an innovative, manualized peer mentorship program designed to provide modeling and reinforcement by peers (mentors) to other African American women with SLE (mentees) to encourage them to engage in activities that promote disease self-management. Through a randomized, "mentored" or "support group" controlled design, we will assess the efficacy and mechanism(s) of this intervention in self-management, disease activity, and HRQOL.

DISCUSSION

This is the first study to test peer mentorship as an alternative strategy to improve outcomes in African American women with SLE. This could result in a model for other programs that aim to improve disease self-management, disease activity, and HRQOL in African American women suffering from chronic illness. The peer mentoring approach is uniquely fitted to African Americans, and this intervention has the potential to lead to health improvements for African American women with SLE that have not been attainable with other interventions. This would significantly reduce disparities and have considerable public health impact.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03734055 . Registered on 27 November 2018.

Cost analysis of implementing a telegeriatrics ecosystem with nursing homes: panel data analysis

Our study analyzed the economicimpact of a telegeriatrics programme on care of nursing homeresidents, from the healthcare system provider's perspective. Thisis a retrospective, archival data analysis of multiple data sourcesin 4 nursing homes of Singapore from 2010 to 2015. Individualsadmitted to nursing homes and have undergone telemedicineconsultations (N=859) from 2010 to 2015 were recruited. Weconducted a cost analysis of the programme by reviewing pasthospital admissions' and specialist outpatient clinic (SOC) visits'billing records, nurse training records, and key performanceindicators' reports. A significant relationship was observed betweenteleconsultations and SOC visit cost (β1 = -83.366, p-value<0.01) and between teleconsultations and inpatient cost (β1 =-470.971, p-value <0.05). Remote video consultations could reduceunnecessary SOC visits and hospital admissions, and thereforelead to cost savings. Training of nursing home nurses couldtranslate to cost savings as a result of decreased ED transfers.

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.

The impact of a remote monitoring system of healthcare resource consumption in patients on automated peritoneal dialysis (APD): A simulation study

Aims: Remote monitoring (RM) can improve management of chronic diseases. We evaluated the impact of RM in automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) in a simulation study. Materials and methods: We simulated 12 patient scenarios with common clinical problems and estimated the likely healthcare resource consumption with and without the availability of RM (RM+ and RM– groups, respectively). Scenarios were evaluated 4 times by randomly allocated nephrologist-nurse teams or nephrologist-alone assessors. Results: The RM+ group was assessed as having significantly lower total healthcare resource consumption compared with the RM– group (36.8 vs. 107.5 total episodes of resource consumption, p = 0.002). The RM+ group showed significantly lower “unplanned hospital visits” (2.3 vs. 11.3, p = 0.005), “emergency room visits” (0.5 vs. 5.3, p = 0.003), “home visits” (0.5 vs. 5.8, p = 0.016), “exchanges over the telephone” (18.5 vs. 57.8, p = 0.002), and “change to hemodialysis” (0.5 vs. 2.5, p = 0.003). Evaluations did not differ between nephrologist-nurse teams vs. nephrologist-alone assessors. Conclusion: RM can be expected to reduce healthcare resource consumption in APD patients.

The HARMONIC trial: study protocol for a randomised controlled feasibility trial of Shaping Healthy Minds-a modular transdiagnostic intervention for mood, stressor-related and anxiety disorders in adults

INTRODUCTION

Anxiety, mood and trauma-related disorders are common, affecting up to 20% of adults. Many of these individuals will experience symptoms of more than one disorder as diagnostically defined. However, most psychological treatments focus on individual disorders and are less effective for those who experience comorbid disorders. The Healthy and Resilient Mind Programme: Building Blocks for Mental Wellbeing (HARMONIC) trial introduces a novel transdiagnostic intervention (Shaping Healthy Minds (SHM)), which synthesises several evidence-based treatment techniques to address the gap in effective interventions for people with complex and comorbid difficulties. This early phase trial aims to estimate the efficacy and feasibility of the transdiagnostic intervention in preparation for a later-phase randomised controlled trial, and to explore mechanisms of change.

METHODS/ANALYSIS

We outline a patient-level two-arm randomised controlled trial (HARMONIC) that compares SHM to treatment-as-usual for individuals aged >18 years (n=50) with comorbid mood, anxiety, obsessive-compulsive or trauma/stressor disorders diagnoses, recruited from outpatient psychological services within the UK National Health Service (NHS). The co-primary outcomes will be 3-month follow-up scores on self-report measures of depressive symptoms, anxiety symptoms, and disability and functional impairment. Secondary outcomes include changes in symptoms linked to individual disorders. We will assess the feasibility and acceptability of SHM, the utility of proposed outcome measures, and refine the treatment manuals in preparation for a later-phase trial.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This trial protocol has been approved by the Health Research Authority of the NHS of the UK (East of England, Reference: 16/EE/0095). We anticipate that trial findings will inform future revisions of clinical guidelines for numerous forms of mood, anxiety and stressor-related disorders. Findings will be disseminated broadly via peer-reviewed empirical journal articles, conference presentations, clinical workshops and a trial website.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03143634; Pre-results.

Prevalence of Depression in the Community from 30 Countries between 1994 and 2014

The prevalence of depression may be affected by changes in psychiatric practices and the availability of online mental health information in the past two decades. This study aimed to evaluate the aggregate prevalence of depression in communities from different countries between 1994 and 2014 and to explore the variations in prevalence stratified by geographical, methodological and socio-economic factors. A total of 90 studies were identified and met the inclusion criteria (n = 1,112,573 adults) with 68 studies on single point prevalence, 9 studies on one-year prevalence, and 13 studies on lifetime prevalence of depression. A random-effects model meta-analysis that was performed to calculate the aggregate point, one-year and lifetime prevalence of depression calculated prevalences of 12.9%, 7.2% and 10.8% respectively. Point prevalence of depression was significantly higher in women (14.4%), countries with a medium human development index (HDI) (29.2%), studies published from 2004 to 2014 (15.4%) and when using self-reporting instruments (17.3%) to assess depression. Heterogeneity was identified by meta-regression and subgroup analysis, and response rate, percentage of women and year of publication, respectively, were determined contribute to depression prevalence. This meta-analysis allows benchmarking of the prevalence of depression during the era when online health information emerged, facilitating future comparisons.

Cost-effectiveness of telehealthcare to patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: results from the Danish 'TeleCare North' cluster-randomised trial

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the cost-effectiveness of a telehealthcare solution in addition to usual care compared with usual care.

DESIGN

A 12-month cost-utility analysis conducted alongside a cluster-randomised trial.

SETTING

Community-based setting in the geographical area of North Denmark Region in Denmark.

PARTICIPANTS

26 municipality districts define randomisation clusters with 13 districts in each arm. 1225 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were enrolled, of which 578 patients were randomised to telehealthcare and 647 to usual care.

INTERVENTIONS

In addition to usual care, patients in the intervention group received a set of telehealthcare equipment and were monitored by a municipality-based healthcare team. Patients in the control group received usual care.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-years gained from baseline up to 12 months follow-up.

RESULTS

From a healthcare and social sector perspective, the adjusted mean difference in total costs between telehealthcare and usual care was €728 (95% CI -754 to 2211) and the adjusted mean difference in quality-adjusted life-years gained was 0.0132 (95% CI -0.0083 to 0.0346). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €55 327 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Decision-makers should be willing to pay more than €55 000 to achieve a probability of cost-effectiveness >50%. This conclusion is robust to changes in the definition of hospital contacts and reduced intervention costs. Only in the most optimistic scenario combining the effects of all sensitivity analyses, does the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio fall below the UK thresholds values (€21 068 per quality-adjusted life-year).

CONCLUSIONS

Telehealthcare is unlikely to be a cost-effective addition to usual care, if it is offered to all patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and if the willingness-to-pay threshold values from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence are applied.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01984840, 14 November 2013.

An evidence-based approach to the use of telehealth in long-term health conditions: development of an intervention and evaluation through pragmatic randomised controlled trials in patients with depression or raised cardiovascular risk

Background

Health services internationally are exploring the potential of telehealth to support the management of the growing number of people with long-term conditions (LTCs).

Aim

To develop, implement and evaluate new care programmes for patients with LTCs, focusing on two common LTCs as exemplars: depression or high cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk.

Methods

Development

We synthesised quantitative and qualitative evidence on the effectiveness of telehealth for LTCs, conducted a qualitative study based on interviews with patients and staff and undertook a postal survey to explore which patients are interested in different forms of telehealth. Based on these studies we developed a conceptual model [TElehealth in CHronic disease (TECH) model] as a framework for the development and evaluation of the Healthlines Service for patients with LTCs.

Implementation

The Healthlines Service consisted of regular telephone calls to participants from health information advisors, supporting them to make behaviour change and to use tailored online resources. Advisors sought to optimise participants’ medication and to improve adherence.

Evaluation

The Healthlines Service was evaluated with linked pragmatic randomised controlled trials comparing the Healthlines Service plus usual care with usual care alone, with nested process and economic evaluations. Participants were adults with depression or raised CVD risk recruited from 43 general practices in three areas of England. The primary outcome was response to treatment and the secondary outcomes included anxiety (depression trial), individual risk factors (CVD risk trial), self-management skills, medication adherence, perceptions of support, access to health care and satisfaction with treatment.

Trial results

Depression trial

In total, 609 participants were randomised and the retention rate was 86%. Response to treatment [Patient Health Questionnaire 9-items (PHQ-9) reduction of ≥ 5 points and score of < 10 after 4 months] was higher in the intervention group (27%, 68/255) than in the control group (19%, 50/270) [odds ratio 1.7, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1 to 2.5;p = 0.02]. Anxiety also improved. Intervention participants reported better access to health support, greater satisfaction with treatment and small improvements in self-management, but not improved medication adherence.

CVD risk trial

In total, 641 participants were randomised and the retention rate was 91%. Response to treatment (maintenance of/reduction in QRISK®2 score after 12 months) was higher in the intervention group (50%, 148/295) than in the control group (43%, 124/291), which does not exclude a null effect (odds ratio 1.3, 95% CI 1.0 to 1.9;p = 0.08). The intervention was associated with small improvements in blood pressure and weight, but not smoking or cholesterol. Intervention participants were more likely to adhere to medication, reported better access to health support and greater satisfaction with treatment, but few improvements in self-management.

The Healthlines Service was likely to be cost-effective for CVD risk, particularly if the benefits are sustained, but not for depression. The intervention was implemented largely as planned, although initial delays and later disruption to delivery because of the closure of NHS Direct may have adversely affected participant engagement.

Conclusion

The Healthlines Service, designed using an evidence-based conceptual model, provided modest health benefits and participants valued the better access to care and extra support provided. This service was cost-effective for CVD risk but not depression. These findings of small benefits at extra cost are consistent with previous pragmatic research on the implementation of comprehensive telehealth programmes for LTCs.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN14172341 (depression trial) and ISRCTN27508731 (CVD risk trial).

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Programme Grants for Applied Research programme.