von der Warth Rieka, Dams Judith, Grochtdreis Thomas, König Hans-Helmut
Department of Health Economics and Health Services Research, Hamburg Center for Health Economics, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Section of Health Care Research and Rehabilitation Research, Medical Center - University of Freiburg, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
Eur J Psychotraumatol. 2020 May 29;11(1):1753940. doi: 10.1080/20008198.2020.1753940.
Posttraumatic stress disorder is associated with a high economic burden. Costs of treatment are known to be high, and cost-effectiveness has been analysed for several treatment options.
As no review on economic aspects of posttraumatic stress disorder exists, the aim of this study was to systematically review costs-of-illness studies and economic evaluations of therapeutic treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder, and to assess their quality.
A systematic literature search was performed in March 2017 and was last updated in February 2020 in the databases PubMed, PsychInfo and NHS Economic Evaluation Database. Cost-of-illness studies and economic evaluations of treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder were selected. Extracted cost data were categorized as direct costs and indirect costs and inflated to 2015 US-$ purchasing power parities (PPP). Quality was assessed using an adapted cost-of-illness studies quality checklist, the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria list, and the questionnaire to assess relevance and credibility of modelling studies by the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcome Research.
In total, 13 cost-of-illness studies and 18 economic evaluations were included in the review. Annual direct excess costs ranged from 512 US-$ PPP to 19,435 US-$ PPP and annual indirect excess costs were 5,021 US-$ PPP per person. Trauma-focused cognitive-behavioural therapy (+selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitor) was found to be cost-effective compared with treatment as usual and no treatment. Overall, included studies were of low and moderate quality. Studies used inappropriate economic study designs and lacked information on the economic perspective used.
Posttraumatic stress disorder is a major public health problem that causes high healthcare costs. While trauma-focused cognitive-behavioural therapy was found to be cost-effective, further investigations regarding pharmacotherapy and other treatments are necessary.
创伤后应激障碍与高昂的经济负担相关。已知治疗成本高昂,并且已经对几种治疗方案的成本效益进行了分析。
由于目前尚无关于创伤后应激障碍经济方面的综述,本研究旨在系统回顾创伤后应激障碍的疾病成本研究和治疗的经济学评价,并评估其质量。
2017年3月进行了系统的文献检索,最近一次更新是在2020年2月,检索了PubMed、PsychInfo和NHS经济评价数据库。选取了创伤后应激障碍的疾病成本研究和治疗的经济学评价。提取的成本数据分为直接成本和间接成本,并按2015年美元购买力平价(PPP)进行通胀调整。使用经过改编的疾病成本研究质量清单、健康经济标准共识清单以及国际药物经济学和成果研究协会用于评估建模研究相关性和可信度的问卷对质量进行评估。
该综述共纳入了13项疾病成本研究和18项经济学评价。年度直接超额成本范围从512美元PPP到19,435美元PPP,人均年度间接超额成本为5,021美元PPP。与常规治疗和不治疗相比,以创伤为重点的认知行为疗法(+选择性5-羟色胺再摄取抑制剂)被发现具有成本效益。总体而言,纳入的研究质量低至中等。研究使用了不恰当的经济学研究设计,并且缺乏关于所采用的经济学视角的信息。
创伤后应激障碍是一个导致高昂医疗成本的主要公共卫生问题。虽然以创伤为重点的认知行为疗法被发现具有成本效益,但仍有必要对药物治疗和其他治疗进行进一步研究。