首页> 外文期刊>Journal of the American Medical Directors Association >Cost-Effectiveness of an Online Intervention for Caregivers of People Living With Dementia
【24h】

Cost-Effectiveness of an Online Intervention for Caregivers of People Living With Dementia

机译:痴呆症患者护理人员在线干预的成本效益

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Objectives: Little evidence exists on costs or cost-effectiveness of online interventions for caregivers of people living with dementia. We aimed to assess cost-effectiveness of online cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for dementia caregivers with mild-to-moderate depression/anxiety, with or without telephone support, relative to a psychoeducational control treatment. Design: Cost-effectiveness study of data from 3-armed randomized controlled trial comparing computerized CBT (cCBT) or telephone-supported cCBT (cCBT+Telephone) to modular online educational program on dementia (Psychoeducation). Setting and Participants: UK-resident adult dementia caregivers with mild-to-moderate anxiety/depression. Cost-effectiveness analysis: We calculated health and social care costs, from participant-reported data collected at baseline, 12, 26 weeks, costs of intervention delivery. We examined 3 outcomes: cost of one-point reduction in General Health Questionnaire-12 (GHQ-12) rating at 26-weeks, cost of prevented "caseness" on GHQ-12 at 26 weeks, and cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) based on Short Form-6 Dimensions (SF-6D) over 26 weeks. Results: Data from 176 participants (44 cCBT, 91 cCBT+Telephone, 41 Psychoeducation) were analyzed. Costs did not differ between cCBT and Psychoeducation; costs were 125 pound higher in cCBT+Telephone. Control and intervention groups did not differ on GHQ-12. Caseness was lower in cCBT+Telephone than Psychoeducation; cost of preventing a case was (sic)610, and probability of cost-effectiveness on this outcome reached 98.5 at willingness to pay (WTP) of (sic)12,900. Mean QALY did not differ between cCBT+Telephone and Psychoeducation. QALY gain in cCBT was 0.01 (95 CI 0.001, 0.021). Cost per QALY was (sic)8130. Although base case probability of cost-effectiveness of cCBT was 93 at WTP-per-QALY of (sic)27,600, sensitivity analyses suggested cCBT+Telephone was the more cost-effective. Conclusions and Implications: We report preliminary evidence for adopting telephone-supported online CBT. This may be cost-effective in preventing a case of mental health disorder if, absent a societally accepted WTP threshold for this outcome, payers are willing to pay (sic)12,900. Future research should investigate whether supported/unsupported online CBT improves health-related quality of life. (C) 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of AMDA - The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine.
机译:研究目的: 关于痴呆患者护理人员在线干预的成本或成本效益的证据很少。我们旨在评估在线认知行为疗法(CBT)对患有轻度至中度抑郁/焦虑的痴呆护理人员的成本效益,无论有没有电话支持,相对于心理教育对照治疗。设计:对 3 臂随机对照试验的数据进行成本效益研究,将计算机化 CBT (cCBT) 或电话支持的 cCBT (cCBT+电话) 与痴呆模块化在线教育计划(心理教育)进行比较。环境和参与者:患有轻度至中度焦虑/抑郁的英国居民成人痴呆护理人员。成本效益分析:我们根据受试者报告的基线、12、26周的数据,计算了健康和社会护理成本,以及干预交付的成本。我们检查了 3 个结局:26 周时一般健康问卷 12 (GHQ-12) 评级降低 1 分的成本、26 周时 GHQ-12 预防“病例”的成本以及 26 周内基于简表 6 维度 (SF-6D) 的每质量调整生命年成本 (QALY)。结果:分析了 176 名参与者(44 名 cCBT、91 名 cCBT+电话、41 名心理教育)的数据。cCBT和心理教育之间的成本没有差异;cCBT+电话的成本高出 125 英镑。对照组和干预组在GHQ-12上没有差异。cCBT+Telephone 的 Caseness 低于心理教育;预防病例的成本为(原文如此)610,当支付意愿(WTP)为(原文如此)12,900时,该结果的成本效益概率达到98.5%。cCBT+Telephone 和 Psychoeducation 之间的平均 QALY 没有差异。cCBT的QALY增益为0.01(95%CI 0.001,0.021)。每个QALY的成本为(原文如此)8130。尽管在(原文如此)27,600 的 WTP-per-QALY 下,cCBT 成本效益的基本概率为 93%,但敏感性分析表明 cCBT+电话更具成本效益。结论和意义:我们报告了采用电话支持的在线CBT的初步证据。如果缺乏社会接受的 WTP 阈值,付款人愿意支付(原文如此)12,900,这可能在预防精神健康障碍病例方面具有成本效益。未来的研究应该调查支持/不支持的在线CBT是否能改善与健康相关的生活质量。(c) 2022 年作者。由爱思唯尔公司(Elsevier Inc.)代表AMDA(急性后和长期护理医学协会)出版。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号