与常规护理相比,行为激活减轻COVID-19对患有抑郁症和多种长期疾病的社会孤立老年人心理影响的成本效用:一项实用随机对照试验的结果。

0 PSYCHIATRY
Han-I Wang,Simon Gilbody,Elizabeth Littlewood,Kalpita Baird,David Ekers,Dean McMillan,Della Bailey,Carolyn Chew-Graham,Peter Coventry,Caroline Fairhurst,Catherine Hewitt,Steve Parrott
{"title":"与常规护理相比,行为激活减轻COVID-19对患有抑郁症和多种长期疾病的社会孤立老年人心理影响的成本效用:一项实用随机对照试验的结果。","authors":"Han-I Wang,Simon Gilbody,Elizabeth Littlewood,Kalpita Baird,David Ekers,Dean McMillan,Della Bailey,Carolyn Chew-Graham,Peter Coventry,Caroline Fairhurst,Catherine Hewitt,Steve Parrott","doi":"10.1136/bmjment-2024-301270","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\r\nDepression alongside multiple long-term conditions (MLTCs) in older adults poses a critical public health challenge, worsening physical and mental health and increasing healthcare costs. COVID-19 restrictions further exacerbated these impacts. Behavioural activation (BA) shows promise as a remote intervention for depression during isolation, but its cost-effectiveness for depressed, socially isolated older adults remains uncertain.\r\n\r\nOBJECTIVE\r\nThis study aimed to assess the cost-utility of BA versus usual care for older adults with depression and MLTCs during COVID-19 restrictions.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nA randomised controlled trial recruited and randomised individuals aged 65 and over with depressive symptoms and MLTC (n=435) to either the BA intervention or usual care. Costs were measured from the perspective of the National Health Service and personal social services. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were measured using the EQ-5D-3L at baseline, and 1, 3 and 12 months postrandomisation. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated, with uncertainty addressed through non-parametric bootstrapping. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the primary analysis.\r\n\r\nFINDINGS\r\nPrimary analysis indicated that BA generated a small cost-saving (£62.34 per older adult; 95% CI: -£120.44 to £239.70) while QALY improvements remained unchanged (0.007; 95% CI -0.036 to 0.022) compared with usual care. The probability of BA being the preferred option is 0.71. Sensitivity analyses supported the primary analysis findings, confirming their robustness.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS\r\nCompared with usual care, BA demonstrated a slight cost reduction while maintaining QALY improvement. The findings provide promise for BA interventions for older people with depression and MLTCs facing isolation.","PeriodicalId":72434,"journal":{"name":"BMJ mental health","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cost-utility of behavioural activation for mitigating psychological impacts of COVID-19 on socially isolated older adults with depression and multiple long-term conditions compared with usual care: results from a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Han-I Wang,Simon Gilbody,Elizabeth Littlewood,Kalpita Baird,David Ekers,Dean McMillan,Della Bailey,Carolyn Chew-Graham,Peter Coventry,Caroline Fairhurst,Catherine Hewitt,Steve Parrott\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/bmjment-2024-301270\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND\\r\\nDepression alongside multiple long-term conditions (MLTCs) in older adults poses a critical public health challenge, worsening physical and mental health and increasing healthcare costs. COVID-19 restrictions further exacerbated these impacts. Behavioural activation (BA) shows promise as a remote intervention for depression during isolation, but its cost-effectiveness for depressed, socially isolated older adults remains uncertain.\\r\\n\\r\\nOBJECTIVE\\r\\nThis study aimed to assess the cost-utility of BA versus usual care for older adults with depression and MLTCs during COVID-19 restrictions.\\r\\n\\r\\nMETHODS\\r\\nA randomised controlled trial recruited and randomised individuals aged 65 and over with depressive symptoms and MLTC (n=435) to either the BA intervention or usual care. Costs were measured from the perspective of the National Health Service and personal social services. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were measured using the EQ-5D-3L at baseline, and 1, 3 and 12 months postrandomisation. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated, with uncertainty addressed through non-parametric bootstrapping. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the primary analysis.\\r\\n\\r\\nFINDINGS\\r\\nPrimary analysis indicated that BA generated a small cost-saving (£62.34 per older adult; 95% CI: -£120.44 to £239.70) while QALY improvements remained unchanged (0.007; 95% CI -0.036 to 0.022) compared with usual care. The probability of BA being the preferred option is 0.71. Sensitivity analyses supported the primary analysis findings, confirming their robustness.\\r\\n\\r\\nCONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS\\r\\nCompared with usual care, BA demonstrated a slight cost reduction while maintaining QALY improvement. The findings provide promise for BA interventions for older people with depression and MLTCs facing isolation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":72434,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMJ mental health\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMJ mental health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjment-2024-301270\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHIATRY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMJ mental health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjment-2024-301270","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:老年人抑郁症伴多种长期疾病(MLTCs)对公共卫生构成了严峻的挑战,使身心健康恶化,并增加了医疗保健费用。COVID-19限制措施进一步加剧了这些影响。行为激活(BA)有望作为隔离期间抑郁症的远程干预手段,但其对抑郁、社会孤立的老年人的成本效益仍不确定。目的:本研究旨在评估在COVID-19限制期间,BA与常规护理对患有抑郁症和MLTCs的老年人的成本-效用。方法一项随机对照试验,招募65岁及以上有抑郁症状和MLTC的个体(n=435),随机接受BA干预或常规护理。费用是从国民保健服务和个人社会服务的角度来衡量的。在基线、随机化后1个月、3个月和12个月使用EQ-5D-3L测量质量调整生命年(QALYs)。计算了增量成本效益比,并通过非参数自举解决了不确定性。进行敏感性分析以评估初步分析的稳健性。初步分析表明,英航节省了少量成本(每位老年人62.34英镑;95% CI: - 120.44英镑至239.70英镑),而质量改善保持不变(0.007;95% CI为-0.036 ~ 0.022)。BA成为首选选项的概率为0.71。敏感性分析支持初步分析结果,证实其稳健性。结论和临床意义与常规护理相比,BA在保持质量改善的同时略微降低了成本。研究结果为面对孤立的老年抑郁症和MLTCs患者提供了BA干预措施的希望。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cost-utility of behavioural activation for mitigating psychological impacts of COVID-19 on socially isolated older adults with depression and multiple long-term conditions compared with usual care: results from a pragmatic randomised controlled trial.
BACKGROUND Depression alongside multiple long-term conditions (MLTCs) in older adults poses a critical public health challenge, worsening physical and mental health and increasing healthcare costs. COVID-19 restrictions further exacerbated these impacts. Behavioural activation (BA) shows promise as a remote intervention for depression during isolation, but its cost-effectiveness for depressed, socially isolated older adults remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to assess the cost-utility of BA versus usual care for older adults with depression and MLTCs during COVID-19 restrictions. METHODS A randomised controlled trial recruited and randomised individuals aged 65 and over with depressive symptoms and MLTC (n=435) to either the BA intervention or usual care. Costs were measured from the perspective of the National Health Service and personal social services. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were measured using the EQ-5D-3L at baseline, and 1, 3 and 12 months postrandomisation. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated, with uncertainty addressed through non-parametric bootstrapping. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the primary analysis. FINDINGS Primary analysis indicated that BA generated a small cost-saving (£62.34 per older adult; 95% CI: -£120.44 to £239.70) while QALY improvements remained unchanged (0.007; 95% CI -0.036 to 0.022) compared with usual care. The probability of BA being the preferred option is 0.71. Sensitivity analyses supported the primary analysis findings, confirming their robustness. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS Compared with usual care, BA demonstrated a slight cost reduction while maintaining QALY improvement. The findings provide promise for BA interventions for older people with depression and MLTCs facing isolation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信