The Journal of clinical psychiatry · 2018
Treatment-Refractory Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder in Adults: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Treatment Strategies.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gregory Sean T, Kay Brian, Smith Joseph, Hall Kristin, De Nadai Alessandro S, Quast Troy, Riemann Bradley C, Storch Eric A
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study sought to assess the cost-effectiveness of 7 treatment strategies for treatment-refractory obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) in adults.
METHODS: A model was developed to evaluate treatment alternatives for adults (18-64 years old) that consisted of 2 parts: a decision analytic model and a Markov model. The decision analytic model stratified 7 outpatient treatment strategies, and the Markov model accumulated benefits and costs across the life expectancy of a simulated cohort of individuals. The model was parameterized with probabilistic and deterministic parameters from the literature and an outcomes database to perform a Monte Carlo simulation of a hypothetical cohort of 100,000 adults with OCD to estimate net health benefits (NHBs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for each treatment strategy. OCD was considered treatment refractory in adults with an OCD diagnosis who failed first-line therapies. Encounters took place from 2012 to 2015, and the analyses were performed from November 2016 to February 2017.
RESULTS: Partial hospitalization with step-down to intensive outpatient treatment was the most cost-effective of the 7 strategies, with an estimated ICER of $7,983 and mean (SD) NHB of 10.96 (0.53) quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) remaining. This result was 2.2 QALYs greater than that of the trial-based antidepressant and cognitive-behavioral therapy (ADM + CBT) strategy. Three additional ADM + CBT strategies were estimated not to be statistically significantly different from each other. These 4 ADM + CBT strategies outperformed both pharmacotherapy-only strategies.
CONCLUSIONS: Treatment strategies that include higher-intensity CBT, with effectiveness outcomes that approached efficacy estimates, were superior to real-world CBT strategies. However, given the limited availability of high-quality CBT, especially through use of commercial insurance networks, specialized treatment programs offer greater effectiveness than real-world therapies in achieving wellness for this severe patient population.
METHODS: A model was developed to evaluate treatment alternatives for adults (18-64 years old) that consisted of 2 parts: a decision analytic model and a Markov model. The decision analytic model stratified 7 outpatient treatment strategies, and the Markov model accumulated benefits and costs across the life expectancy of a simulated cohort of individuals. The model was parameterized with probabilistic and deterministic parameters from the literature and an outcomes database to perform a Monte Carlo simulation of a hypothetical cohort of 100,000 adults with OCD to estimate net health benefits (NHBs), costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for each treatment strategy. OCD was considered treatment refractory in adults with an OCD diagnosis who failed first-line therapies. Encounters took place from 2012 to 2015, and the analyses were performed from November 2016 to February 2017.
RESULTS: Partial hospitalization with step-down to intensive outpatient treatment was the most cost-effective of the 7 strategies, with an estimated ICER of $7,983 and mean (SD) NHB of 10.96 (0.53) quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) remaining. This result was 2.2 QALYs greater than that of the trial-based antidepressant and cognitive-behavioral therapy (ADM + CBT) strategy. Three additional ADM + CBT strategies were estimated not to be statistically significantly different from each other. These 4 ADM + CBT strategies outperformed both pharmacotherapy-only strategies.
CONCLUSIONS: Treatment strategies that include higher-intensity CBT, with effectiveness outcomes that approached efficacy estimates, were superior to real-world CBT strategies. However, given the limited availability of high-quality CBT, especially through use of commercial insurance networks, specialized treatment programs offer greater effectiveness than real-world therapies in achieving wellness for this severe patient population.