Institute for Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Marchioninistraße 17, 81377, Munich, Germany.
Eur J Health Econ. 2011 Oct;12(5):489-97. doi: 10.1007/s10198-010-0266-y. Epub 2010 Aug 6.
Anxiety and fear are often associated with chronic conditions such as cancer. This paper targets the cost-effectiveness analysis of a cognitive-behavioral group therapy (CBT) in comparison to a client-centered, supportive-experiential group therapy (SET) in cancer patients with dysfunctional fear of progression. An incremental cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using data from a randomized controlled trial among cancer patients receiving inpatient rehabilitation. The means, 95% confidence intervals [95% CI], incremental cost-effectiveness graphic and acceptability curve were obtained from 1,000 bootstrap replications. A total of 174 patients were included in the economic evaluation. The estimated means [95% CI] of direct costs and reduction of fear of progression were
焦虑和恐惧通常与癌症等慢性疾病有关。本文针对的是一种认知行为团体治疗(CBT)与以患者为中心的支持性体验团体治疗(SET)相比,在癌症进展恐惧障碍患者中的成本效益分析。采用癌症患者接受住院康复治疗的随机对照试验数据进行增量成本效益分析。从 1000 次自举复制中获得平均值、95%置信区间[95%CI]、增量成本效益图和可接受性曲线。共有 174 名患者纳入经济评估。SET 组患者的直接成本和恐惧进展减少的估计平均值[95%CI]为<欧元>9045.03 [6,359.07; 12,091.87]和 1.41 [0.93; 1.92],CBT 组患者的直接成本和恐惧进展减少的估计平均值[95%CI]为<欧元>6682.78 [4,998.09; 8,440.95]和 1.44 [1.02; 1.09]。增量成本效益比[95%CI]为负<欧元>-78741.66 [-154987.20; 110486.32],表示每增加一个效果单位的额外成本。根据可接受性曲线,CBT 与 SET 相比,在不增加支付者成本的情况下,具有 92.4%的可能性具有成本效益。我们的主要结果是,与非直接接触小组相比,认知行为干预方案在我们的高焦虑癌症患者样本中具有更高的成本效益。