Cost-effectiveness of three internet-based interventions for eating disorders: A randomized controlled trial

被引:9
作者
Rohrbach, Pieter J. [1 ,2 ]
Dingemans, Alexandra E. [1 ]
van Furth, Eric F. [1 ,2 ]
Spinhoven, Philip [2 ,3 ]
van Ginkel, Joost R. [3 ]
Bauer, Stephanie [4 ]
van den Akker-Van Marle, M. Elske [5 ]
机构
[1] GGZ Rivierduinen Eetstoornissen Ursula, Leiden, Netherlands
[2] Leiden Univ, Dept Psychiat, Med Ctr, Leiden, Netherlands
[3] Leiden Univ, Inst Psychol, Leiden, Netherlands
[4] Heidelberg Univ, Ctr Psychotherapy Res, Heidelberg, Germany
[5] Leiden Univ, Dept Biomed Sci, Med Ctr, Sect Med Decis Making, Leiden, Netherlands
关键词
cost-benefit analysis; cost-effectiveness; eating disorders; economic evaluation; eHealth; expert patient; internet-based intervention; quality of life; randomized controlled trial; COGNITIVE-BEHAVIORAL THERAPY; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; ANOREXIA-NERVOSA; ECONOMIC EVALUATIONS; CLINICAL-EFFICACY; BULIMIA-NERVOSA; HEALTH; BURDEN; PREVENTION; DEPRESSION;
D O I
10.1002/eat.23763
中图分类号
B849 [应用心理学];
学科分类号
040203 ;
摘要
Objective The primary aim was assessing the cost-effectiveness of an internet-based self-help program, expert-patient support, and the combination of both compared to a care-as-usual condition. Method An economic evaluation from a societal perspective was conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial. Participants aged 16 or older with at least mild eating disorder symptoms were randomly assigned to four conditions: (1) Featback, an online unguided self-help program, (2) chat or e-mail support from a recovered expert patient, (3) Featback with expert-patient support, and (4) care-as-usual. After a baseline assessment and intervention period of 8 weeks, five online assessments were conducted over 12 months of follow-up. The main result constituted cost-utility acceptability curves with quality-of-life adjusted life years (QALYs) and societal costs over the entire study duration. Results No significant differences between the conditions were found regarding QALYs, health care costs and societal costs. Nonsignificant differences in QALYs were in favor of the Featback conditions and the lowest societal costs per participant were observed in the Featback only condition (euro16,741) while the highest costs were seen in the care-as-usual condition (euro28,479). The Featback only condition had the highest probability of being efficient compared to the alternatives for all acceptable willingness-to-pay values. Discussion Featback, an internet-based unguided self-help intervention, was likely to be efficient compared to Featback with guidance from an expert patient, guidance alone and a care-as-usual condition. Results suggest that scalable interventions such as Featback may reduce health care costs and help individuals with eating disorders that are currently not reached by other forms of treatment. Public significance statement Internet-based interventions for eating disorders might reach individuals in society who currently do not receive appropriate treatment at low costs. Featback, an online automated self-help program for eating disorders, was found to improve quality of life slightly while reducing costs for society, compared to a do-nothing approach. Consequently, implementing internet-based interventions such as Featback likely benefits both individuals suffering from an eating disorder and society as a whole.
引用
收藏
页码:1143 / 1155
页数:13
相关论文
共 52 条
[1]   Cost-utility of an internet-based intervention with or without therapist support in comparison with a waiting list for individuals with eating disorder symptoms: a randomized controlled trial [J].
Aardoom, J. J. ;
Dingemans, A. E. ;
van Ginkel, J. R. ;
Spinhoven, P. ;
Van Furth, E. F. ;
Van den Akker-van Marle, M. E. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EATING DISORDERS, 2016, 49 (12) :1068-1076
[2]   Web-Based Fully Automated Self-Help With Different Levels of Therapist Support for Individuals With Eating Disorder Symptoms: A Randomized Controlled Trial [J].
Aardoom, Jiska J. ;
Dingemans, Alexandra E. ;
Spinhoven, Philip ;
van Ginkel, Joost R. ;
de Rooij, Mark ;
van Furth, Eric F. .
JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INTERNET RESEARCH, 2016, 18 (06)
[3]   E-Health Interventions for Eating Disorders: Emerging Findings, Issues, and Opportunities [J].
Aardoom, Jiska J. ;
Dingemans, Alexandra E. ;
Van Furth, Eric F. .
CURRENT PSYCHIATRY REPORTS, 2016, 18 (04)
[4]   Discharge planning, self-management, and community support: Strategies to avoid psychiatric rehospitalisation from a service user perspective [J].
Adnanes, M. ;
Cresswell-Smith, J. ;
Melby, L. ;
Westerlund, H. ;
Sprah, L. ;
Sfetcu, R. ;
Strassmayr, C. ;
Donisi, V .
PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2020, 103 (05) :1033-1040
[5]   A Systematic Review of the Feasibility and Psychometric Properties of the ICEpop CAPability Measure for Adults and Its Use So Far in Economic Evaluation [J].
Afentou, Nafsika ;
Kinghorn, Philip .
VALUE IN HEALTH, 2020, 23 (04) :515-526
[6]   A systematic review of the health-related quality of life and economic burdens of anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa, and binge eating disorder [J].
Agh, Tamas ;
Kovacs, Gabor ;
Supina, Dylan ;
Pawaskar, Manjiri ;
Herman, Barry K. ;
Voko, Zoltan ;
Sheehan, David V. .
EATING AND WEIGHT DISORDERS-STUDIES ON ANOREXIA BULIMIA AND OBESITY, 2016, 21 (03) :353-364
[7]   Clinical efficacy and economic evaluation of online cognitive behavioral therapy for major depressive disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis [J].
Ahern, Elayne ;
Kinsella, Stephen ;
Semkovska, Maria .
EXPERT REVIEW OF PHARMACOECONOMICS & OUTCOMES RESEARCH, 2018, 18 (01) :25-41
[8]   Cost-Effectiveness Comparison of Delivery Modalities for a Dissonance-Based Eating Disorder Prevention Program over 4-Year Follow-Up [J].
Akers, Laura ;
Rohde, Paul ;
Shaw, Heather ;
Stice, Eric .
PREVENTION SCIENCE, 2021, 22 (08) :1086-1095
[9]   Development of a self-report measure of capability wellbeing for adults: the ICECAP-A [J].
Al-Janabi, Hareth ;
Flynn, Terry N. ;
Coast, Joanna .
QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2012, 21 (01) :167-176
[10]  
[Anonymous], 2020, Social and economic cost of eating disorders in the United States of America