Wang Philip S, Patrick Amanda, Avorn Jerry, Azocar Francisca, Ludman Evette, McCulloch Joyce, Simon Gregory, Kessler Ronald
Department of Psychiatry, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, USA.
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2006 Dec;63(12):1345-53. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.63.12.1345.
Although outreach and enhanced treatment interventions improve depression outcomes, uptake has been poor in part because purchasers lack information on their return on investment.
To estimate the costs and benefits of enhanced depression care for workers from the societal and employer-purchaser perspectives.
Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses using state-transition Markov models. Simulated movements between health states were based on probabilities drawn from the clinical literature.
Hypothetical cohort of 40-year-old workers. Intervention Enhanced depression care consisting of a depression screen and care management for those depressed vs usual care.
Our base-case cost-effectiveness analysis was from the societal perspective; costs and quality-adjusted life-years were used to compute the incremental cost-effectiveness of the intervention relative to usual care. A secondary cost-benefit analysis from the employer's perspective tracked monetary costs and monetary benefits accruing to employers during a 5-year time horizon.
From the societal perspective, screening and depression care management for workers result in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $19 976 per quality-adjusted life-year relative to usual care. These results are consistent with recent primary care effectiveness trials and within the range for medical interventions usually covered by employer-sponsored insurance. From the employer's perspective, enhanced depression care yields a net cumulative benefit of $2895 after 5 years. In 1-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, these findings were robust to a variety of assumptions.
If these results can be replicated in effectiveness trials directly assessing effects on work outcomes, they suggest that enhanced treatment quality programs for depression are cost-beneficial to purchasers.
尽管外展服务和强化治疗干预措施能改善抑郁症治疗效果,但接受度一直很低,部分原因是购买者缺乏投资回报率的信息。
从社会和雇主购买者的角度估计强化抑郁症护理对工人的成本和收益。
使用状态转换马尔可夫模型进行成本效益和成本效益分析。健康状态之间的模拟转移基于从临床文献中得出的概率。
40岁工人的假设队列。干预措施:强化抑郁症护理,包括对抑郁症患者进行抑郁症筛查和护理管理,与常规护理相比。
我们的基本成本效益分析是从社会角度进行的;成本和质量调整生命年用于计算干预措施相对于常规护理的增量成本效益。从雇主角度进行的二次成本效益分析跟踪了5年时间范围内雇主产生的货币成本和货币收益。
从社会角度来看,对工人进行筛查和抑郁症护理管理相对于常规护理,每质量调整生命年的增量成本效益比为19976美元。这些结果与最近的初级保健效果试验一致,且在雇主赞助保险通常涵盖的医疗干预范围内。从雇主角度来看,强化抑郁症护理在5年后产生的净累积收益为2895美元。在单因素和概率敏感性分析中,这些发现对各种假设都具有稳健性。
如果这些结果能够在直接评估对工作成果影响的效果试验中得到复制,那么它们表明强化抑郁症治疗质量计划对购买者具有成本效益。