Clinical, Neuro- and Developmental Psychology Department, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
National Mental Health Programme, Ministry of Public Health, Beirut, Lebanon.
JMIR Ment Health. 2024 May 29;11:e55544. doi: 10.2196/55544.
There is evidence from meta-analyses and systematic reviews that digital mental health interventions for depression, anxiety, and stress-related disorders tend to be cost-effective. However, no such evidence exists for guided digital mental health care in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) facing humanitarian crises, where the needs are highest. Step-by-Step (SbS), a digital mental health intervention for depression, anxiety, and stress-related disorders, proved to be effective for Lebanese citizens and war-affected Syrians residing in Lebanon. Assessing the cost-effectiveness of SbS is crucial because Lebanon's overstretched health care system must prioritize cost-effective treatment options in the face of continuing humanitarian and economic crises.
This study aims to assess the cost-effectiveness of SbS in a randomized comparison with enhanced usual care (EUC).
The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted alongside a pragmatic randomized controlled trial in 2 parallel groups comparing SbS (n=614) with EUC (n=635). The primary outcome was cost (in US $ for the reference year 2019) per treatment response of depressive symptoms, defined as >50% reduction of depressive symptoms measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ). The secondary outcome was cost per remission of depressive symptoms, defined as a PHQ score <5 at last follow-up (5 months post baseline). The evaluation was conducted first from the health care perspective then from the societal perspective.
Taking the health care perspective, SbS had an 80% probability to be regarded as cost-effective compared with EUC when there is a willingness to pay US $220 per additional treatment response or US $840 per additional remission. Taking the wider societal perspective, SbS had a >75% probability to be cost-saving while gaining response or remission.
To our knowledge, this study is the first cost-effectiveness analysis based on a large randomized controlled trial (n=1249) of a guided digital mental health intervention in an LMIC. From the principal findings, 2 implications flowed, from the (1) health care perspective and (2) wider societal perspective. First, our findings suggest that SbS is associated with greater health benefits, albeit for higher costs than EUC. It is up to decision makers in health care to decide if they find the balance between additional health gains and additional health care costs acceptable. Second, as seen from the wider societal perspective, there is a substantial likelihood that SbS is not costing more than EUC but is associated with cost-savings as SBS participants become more productive, thus offsetting their health care costs. This finding may suggest to policy makers that it is in the interest of both population health and the wider Lebanese economy to implement SbS on a wide scale. In brief, SbS may offer a scalable, potentially cost-saving response to humanitarian emergencies in an LMIC.
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03720769; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03720769.
INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.2196/21585.
荟萃分析和系统评价的证据表明,针对抑郁、焦虑和应激相关障碍的数字心理健康干预措施往往具有成本效益。然而,在面临人道主义危机的中低收入国家(LMICs),针对这些国家的有指导的数字心理健康护理却没有这样的证据,而这些国家的需求最高。Step-by-Step(SbS)是一种针对抑郁、焦虑和应激相关障碍的数字心理健康干预措施,已被证明对黎巴嫩公民和居住在黎巴嫩的受战争影响的叙利亚人有效。评估 SbS 的成本效益至关重要,因为黎巴嫩已经不堪重负的医疗保健系统必须在持续的人道主义和经济危机中优先考虑具有成本效益的治疗选择。
本研究旨在评估 SbS 与增强型常规护理(EUC)随机比较的成本效益。
该成本效益分析与一项平行组、随机、实用性临床试验同时进行,比较 SbS(n=614)与 EUC(n=635)。主要结局是治疗反应的成本(以 2019 年参考年的美元计),定义为使用患者健康问卷(PHQ)测量的抑郁症状减少≥50%。次要结局是抑郁症状缓解的成本,定义为最后一次随访(基线后 5 个月)时 PHQ 评分<5。评估首先从医疗保健角度进行,然后从更广泛的社会角度进行。
从医疗保健角度来看,如果愿意为每增加一个治疗反应支付 220 美元或每增加一个缓解支付 840 美元,那么 SbS 比 EUC 更有可能被认为具有成本效益。从更广泛的社会角度来看,SbS 具有成本节约的可能性大于 75%,同时也能获得反应或缓解。
据我们所知,这是第一项基于针对 LMIC 中指导型数字心理健康干预措施的大型随机对照试验(n=1249)的成本效益分析。从主要发现中,有两个结论,一个是从(1)医疗保健角度,另一个是更广泛的社会角度。首先,我们的研究结果表明,SbS 与更大的健康益处相关,尽管成本高于 EUC。是否接受额外的健康收益和额外的医疗保健成本之间的平衡,取决于医疗保健决策者。其次,从更广泛的社会角度来看,SbS 不太可能比 EUC 花费更多,但由于 SbS 参与者变得更有生产力,从而抵消了他们的医疗保健成本,因此存在大量的成本节约可能性。这一发现可能向政策制定者表明,在黎巴嫩这样的中低收入国家,广泛实施 SbS 符合人口健康和更广泛的黎巴嫩经济的利益。简而言之,SbS 可能为 LMIC 中的人道主义紧急情况提供一种可扩展的、潜在的成本节约应对措施。
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03720769; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03720769.
国际注册报告标识符(IRRID):RR2-10.2196/21585.