Morey Edward, Thacher Jennifer A, Craighead W Edward
Department of Economics, University of Colorado-Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA.
J Ment Health Policy Econ. 2007 Jun;10(2):73-85.
Current estimates of the societal costs of depression do not include estimates of how much individuals diagnosed with Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) would be willing to pay to eliminate their depression or how much they would have to be paid in order to accept continued depression. Choice-question data and discrete-choice random-utility models provide a useful method for valuing changes in mental health and mental-health treatment programs.
(i) To demonstrate how choice questions and discrete-choice random-utility models can be used to estimate preferences over treatment programs for depression and willingness-to-pay (WTP) to eliminate depression. (ii) To investigate whether consumption of goods provides less utility when one is depressed (an anhedonia effect) and, if so, the magnitude of the effect. (iii) To model and estimate the extent of heterogeneity in preferences for treatment programs for depression. (iv) To derive preliminary estimates of WTP and willingness-to-accept (WTA) for eliminating depression, both with, and without side effects.
The data are from a choice-question survey of 104 individuals diagnosed with a new episode of MDD. Individuals indicated their preferred treatment from options that varied in effectiveness, hours of psychotherapy per month, use of anti-depressants, money costs, and side effects (weight gain, little or no interest in sex, inability to orgasm). Choices over treatment alternatives, including no treatment, were modeled using a discrete-choice random-utility model. Preference parameters were estimated using maximum likelihood estimation.
Estimated WTP to eliminate MDD is large but side effects can substantially reduce WTP. Preferences over treatment programs, and WTP, vary as a function of the individual's age, gender, income category, body-mass-index, and family composition. Some depressed individuals seeking treatment have a high estimated probability of choosing no treatment. Depression is found to have a direct, negative impact on utility, as expected. It also has an indirect effect: utility from consumption is found to decrease the more severe one's level of depression. The magnitude of this indirect effect is estimated. This indirect effect manifests itself by driving a wedge between estimated WTP to eliminate depression and WTA to accept continued depression. Preferences for treatment are only being estimated for those individuals who are referred to or directly seek treatment at a mental-health clinic, not for the general population of depressed. The estimates are plausible but the sample size is small, so caution is warranted.
The WTP estimates suggest that depression imposes a high cost on society beyond the cost of treatment and the cost of lost output. WTP should be included in any benefit-cost analysis of whether additional societal resources should be allocated to the treatment of depression. Side effects from anti-depressants also impose a large cost on society. Estimates such as the ones reported here could provide a mechanism for better matching treatment programs to the patient and thus potentially reduce non-adherence. The WTP estimates suggest that the pharmaceutical industry could increase revenues by making anti-depressants more effective or reducing their side effects.
目前对抑郁症社会成本的估计未包括被诊断为重度抑郁症(MDD)的个体为消除抑郁愿意支付的金额,或为接受持续抑郁需要获得的补偿金额。选择问题数据和离散选择随机效用模型为评估心理健康及心理健康治疗项目的变化提供了一种有用的方法。
(i)证明如何使用选择问题和离散选择随机效用模型来估计对抑郁症治疗方案的偏好以及消除抑郁的支付意愿(WTP)。(ii)调查当个体处于抑郁状态时商品消费是否带来较低的效用(快感缺失效应),若存在,该效应的程度。(iii)对抑郁症治疗方案偏好的异质性程度进行建模和估计。(iv)得出消除抑郁的支付意愿(WTP)和接受意愿(WTA)的初步估计值,包括有副作用和无副作用的情况。
数据来自对104名被诊断为新发MDD个体的选择问题调查。个体从有效性、每月心理治疗时长、抗抑郁药使用、金钱成本和副作用(体重增加、对性兴趣很少或没有、无法达到性高潮)各不相同的选项中表明其偏好的治疗方法。使用离散选择随机效用模型对包括不治疗在内的治疗方案选择进行建模。偏好参数采用最大似然估计法进行估计。
消除MDD的估计支付意愿很高,但副作用会大幅降低支付意愿。对治疗方案的偏好以及支付意愿因个体的年龄、性别、收入类别、体重指数和家庭构成而异。一些寻求治疗的抑郁个体选择不治疗的估计概率较高。正如预期的那样,发现抑郁对效用有直接的负面影响。它还有间接影响:发现抑郁程度越严重,消费带来的效用下降越多。估计了这种间接影响的程度。这种间接影响表现为消除抑郁的估计支付意愿与接受持续抑郁的接受意愿之间存在差距。这里仅对那些在心理健康诊所接受转诊或直接寻求治疗的个体的治疗偏好进行了估计,而非针对所有抑郁人群。这些估计看似合理,但样本量较小,因此需谨慎对待。
支付意愿估计表明,抑郁症给社会带来的成本高于治疗成本和产出损失成本。在任何关于是否应向抑郁症治疗分配额外社会资源的效益成本分析中,都应纳入支付意愿。抗抑郁药的副作用也给社会带来巨大成本。此处报告的这类估计可为使治疗方案更好地匹配患者从而潜在地减少不依从性提供一种机制。支付意愿估计表明,制药行业可通过提高抗抑郁药的有效性或减少其副作用来增加收入。