Division of Psychology, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Division of Psychology, Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Behav Res Ther. 2018 Aug;107:95-105. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2018.06.002. Epub 2018 Jun 15.
Strategies to increase the availability of cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) for severe health anxiety (SHA) are needed, and this study investigated the cost-effectiveness and long-term efficacy of three forms of minimal-contact CBT for SHA. We hypothesised that therapist-guided internet CBT (G-ICBT), unguided internet CBT (U-ICBT), and cognitive behavioural bibliotherapy (BIB-CBT) would all be more cost-effective than a waiting-list condition (WLC), as assessed over the main phase of the trial. We also hypothesised that improvements would remain stable up to one-year follow-up. Adults (N = 132) with principal SHA were randomised to 12 weeks of G-ICBT, U-ICBT, BIB-CBT, or WLC. The primary measure of cost-effectiveness was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, or the between-group difference in per capita costs divided by the between-group difference in proportion of participants in remission. The Health anxiety inventory (HAI) was the primary efficacy outcome. G-ICBT, U-ICBT, and BIB-CBT were more cost-effective than the WLC. Over the follow-up period, the G-ICBT and BIB-CBT groups made further improvements in health anxiety, whereas the U-ICBT group did not change. As expected, all three treatments were cost-effective with persistent long-term effects. CBT without therapist support appears to be a valuable alternative to G-ICBT for scaling up treatment for SHA.
需要增加认知行为疗法(CBT)对严重健康焦虑症(SHA)的可及性的策略,本研究调查了三种形式的最低接触认知行为疗法(SHA)对 SHA 的成本效益和长期疗效。我们假设,与等待名单条件(WLC)相比,治疗师指导的互联网认知行为疗法(G-ICBT)、非指导的互联网认知行为疗法(U-ICBT)和认知行为自助疗法(BIB-CBT)都将更具成本效益,正如试验的主要阶段所评估的那样。我们还假设,改善情况将在一年的随访中保持稳定。患有主要 SHA 的成年人(N=132)被随机分配到 12 周的 G-ICBT、U-ICBT、BIB-CBT 或 WLC。成本效益的主要衡量标准是增量成本效益比,即组间人均成本差异除以缓解组与未缓解组之间的比例差异。健康焦虑量表(HAI)是主要疗效结果。G-ICBT、U-ICBT 和 BIB-CBT 比 WLC 更具成本效益。在随访期间,G-ICBT 和 BIB-CBT 组的健康焦虑症进一步改善,而 U-ICBT 组没有变化。正如预期的那样,所有三种治疗方法都是具有成本效益的,并且具有持久的长期效果。没有治疗师支持的 CBT 似乎是为 SHA 扩大治疗规模提供 G-ICBT 的一种有价值的替代方法。