Author:
Gerhards S. A. H.,de Graaf L. E.,Jacobs L. E.,Severens J. L.,Huibers M. J. H.,Arntz A.,Riper H.,Widdershoven G.,Metsemakers J. F. M.,Evers S. M. A. A.
Abstract
BackgroundEvidence about the cost-effectiveness and cost utility of computerised
cognitive–behavioural therapy (CCBT) is still limited. Recently, we
compared the clinical effectiveness of unsupported, online CCBT with
treatment as usual (TAU) and a combination of CCBT and TAU (CCBT plus
TAU) for depression. The study is registered at the Netherlands Trial
Register, part of the Dutch Cochrane Centre (ISRCTN47481236).AimsTo assess the cost-effectiveness of CCBT compared with TAU and CCBT plus
TAU.MethodCosts, depression severity and quality of life were measured for 12
months. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses were performed from
a societal perspective. Uncertainty was dealt with by bootstrap
replications and sensitivity analyses.ResultsCosts were lowest for the CCBT group. There are no significant group
differences in effectiveness or quality of life. Cost-utility and
cost-effectiveness analyses tend to be in favour of CCBT.ConclusionsOn balance, CCBT constitutes the most efficient treatment strategy,
although all treatments showed low adherence rates and modest
improvements in depression and quality of life.
Publisher
Royal College of Psychiatrists
Subject
Psychiatry and Mental health