Search

PURPOSE: To assess the impact of EQ-5D country-specific value sets on cost-utility outcomes.METHODS: Data from 2 randomized controlled trials on low back pain (LBP) and depression were used. 3L value sets were identified from the EuroQol Web site. A nonparametric crosswalk was employed for each tariff to obtain the likely 5L values. Differences in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) between countries were tested using paired t tests, with United Kingdom as reference. Cost-utility outcomes were estimated for both studies and both EQ-5D versions, including differences in QALYs and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.RESULTS: For the 3L, QALYs ranged between 0.650 (Taiwan) and 0.892 (United States) in the LBP study and between 0.619 (Taiwan) and 0.879 (United States) in the depression study. In both studies, most country-specific QALY estimates differed statistically significantly from that of the United Kingdom. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged between &OV0556;2044/QALY (Taiwan) and &OV0556;5897/QALY (Zimbabwe) in the LBP study and between &OV0556;38,287/QALY (Singapore) and &OV0556;96,550/QALY (Japan) in the depression study. At the NICE threshold of &OV0556;23,300/QALY (≈£20,000/QALY), the intervention's probability of being cost-effective versus control ranged between 0.751 (Zimbabwe) and 0.952 (Taiwan) and between 0.230 (Canada) and 0.396 (Singapore) in the LBP study and depression study, respectively. Similar results were found for the 5L, with extensive differences in ICERs and moderate differences in the probability of cost-effectiveness.CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that the use of different EQ-5D country-specific value sets impacts on cost-utility outcomes. Therefore, to account for the fact that health state preferences are affected by sociocultural differences, relevant country-specific value sets should be used.

Background: Depressive symptoms are common in older adults. The effectiveness of pharmacological treatments and the availability of psychological treatments in primary care are limited. A behavioural approach to depression treatment might be beneficial to many older adults but such care is still largely unavailable. Behavioural Activation (BA) protocols are less complicated and more easy to train than other psychological therapies, making them very suitable for delivery by less specialised therapists. The recent introduction of the mental health nurse in primary care centres in the Netherlands has created major opportunities for improving the accessibility of psychological treatments for late-life depression in primary care. BA may thus address the needs of older patients while improving treatment outcome and lowering costs.The primary objective of this study is to compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of BA in comparison with treatment as usual (TAU) for late-life depression in Dutch primary care. A secondary goal is to explore several potential mechanisms of change, as well as predictors and moderators of treatment outcome of BA for late-life depression. Methods/design: Cluster-randomised controlled multicentre trial with two parallel groups: a) behavioural activation, and b) treatment as usual, conducted in primary care centres with a follow-up of 52 weeks. The main inclusion criterion is a PHQ-9 score > 9. Patients are excluded from the trial in case of severe mental illness that requires specialized treatment, high suicide risk, drug and/or alcohol abuse, prior psychotherapy, change in dosage or type of prescribed antidepressants in the previous 12 weeks, or moderate to severe cognitive impairment. The intervention consists of 8 weekly 30-min BA sessions delivered by a trained mental health nurse. Discussion: We expect BA to be an effective and cost-effective treatment for late-life depression compared to TAU. BA delivered by mental health nurs

Background: Depressive symptoms are common in older adults. The effectiveness of pharmacological treatments and the availability of psychological treatments in primary care are limited. A behavioural approach to depression treatment might be beneficial to many older adults but such care is still largely unavailable. Behavioural Activation (BA) protocols are less complicated and more easy to train than other psychological therapies, making them very suitable for delivery by less specialised therapists. The recent introduction of the mental health nurse in primary care centres in the Netherlands has created major opportunities for improving the accessibility of psychological treatments for late-life depression in primary care. BA may thus address the needs of older patients while improving treatment outcome and lowering costs.The primary objective of this study is to compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of BA in comparison with treatment as usual (TAU) for late-life depression in Dutch primary care. A secondary goal is to explore several potential mechanisms of change, as well as predictors and moderators of treatment outcome of BA for late-life depression. Methods/design: Cluster-randomised controlled multicentre trial with two parallel groups: a) behavioural activation, and b) treatment as usual, conducted in primary care centres with a follow-up of 52 weeks. The main inclusion criterion is a PHQ-9 score > 9. Patients are excluded from the trial in case of severe mental illness that requires specialized treatment, high suicide risk, drug and/or alcohol abuse, prior psychotherapy, change in dosage or type of prescribed antidepressants in the previous 12 weeks, or moderate to severe cognitive impairment. The intervention consists of 8 weekly 30-min BA sessions delivered by a trained mental health nurse. Discussion: We expect BA to be an effective and cost-effective treatment for late-life depression compared to TAU. BA delivered by mental health nurs

OBJECTIVES: Many older adults have significant depressive symptoms but few people access care for these. This study explores which personal, clinical and need factors facilitate or hinder acceptance of a new outreaching preference-led intervention programme.METHODS: From a sample of 9661 community-dwelling 65+ year olds, 244 persons with depressive symptoms according to the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 were included. Data on programme effectiveness in terms of care utilisation were collected. Associations between programme acceptance and personal, clinical and need factors were studied using quantitative (logistic regression analyses) and qualitative methods (semi-structured interviews with 26 subjects, who accepted (n = 20) or declined (n = 6) the programme).RESULTS: Fifty-six per cent (n = 137) took part in the interventions. Quantitative logistic regression analyses showed that participants were more often female, suffered from more severe depressive symptoms and perceived more loneliness. Qualitative analyses revealed that people accepting the intervention programme felt that medical terms as having a depressed mood were applicable to their situation, more often perceived their symptoms as hindering, felt lonely and more often perceived a need for care. They were more often advised by their general practitioner to participate than individuals who refused the interventions. Many participating individuals did not see a match between the intervention programme and their needs, especially with respect to meeting new people.CONCLUSION: Many older persons with depressive symptoms did not feel the need to take part in the programme. Providing support in alleviating loneliness and further adaptation to older adults' illness representations and perceptions when discussing depressive symptoms might enhance care utilisation.

OBJECTIVES: Many older adults have significant depressive symptoms but few people access care for these. This study explores which personal, clinical and need factors facilitate or hinder acceptance of a new outreaching preference-led intervention programme.METHODS: From a sample of 9661 community-dwelling 65+ year olds, 244 persons with depressive symptoms according to the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 were included. Data on programme effectiveness in terms of care utilisation were collected. Associations between programme acceptance and personal, clinical and need factors were studied using quantitative (logistic regression analyses) and qualitative methods (semi-structured interviews with 26 subjects, who accepted (n = 20) or declined (n = 6) the programme).RESULTS: Fifty-six per cent (n = 137) took part in the interventions. Quantitative logistic regression analyses showed that participants were more often female, suffered from more severe depressive symptoms and perceived more loneliness. Qualitative analyses revealed that people accepting the intervention programme felt that medical terms as having a depressed mood were applicable to their situation, more often perceived their symptoms as hindering, felt lonely and more often perceived a need for care. They were more often advised by their general practitioner to participate than individuals who refused the interventions. Many participating individuals did not see a match between the intervention programme and their needs, especially with respect to meeting new people.CONCLUSION: Many older persons with depressive symptoms did not feel the need to take part in the programme. Providing support in alleviating loneliness and further adaptation to older adults' illness representations and perceptions when discussing depressive symptoms might enhance care utilisation.

BACKGROUND: Depressive symptoms are highly prevalent in old age, but they remain mostly untreated. Several clinical trials have shown promising results in preventing or reducing depressive symptoms. However, it is not clear how robust these effects are in the real world of day-to-day care. Therefore, we have implemented the 'Lust for Life' programme, which significantly reduced depressive symptoms in community-dwelling older adults in the first three months after implementation. This mixed-methods study was conducted alongside the trial to develop a contextualised understanding of factors affecting the implementation.METHODS: A total of 263 persons of 65 years and older with depressive symptoms were recruited from 18 general practices and home care organizations in the Netherlands. We used qualitative data (in-depth interviews and focus group discussions with participants with depressive symptoms and healthcare professionals) as well as quantitative data (longitudinal data on the severity of depressive symptoms) to explore hindering and facilitating factors to the implementation of the 'Lust for Life' programme.RESULTS: The uptake of the routine screening was poor and imposed significant burdens on participants and healthcare professionals, and drop-out rates were high. Participants' perceived mental problems and need for care played a key role in their decision to participate in the programme and to step up to consequent interventions. Older people preferred interventions that focused on interpersonal contact. The programme was only effective when delivered by mental healthcare nurses, compared to home care nurses with limited experience in providing mental healthcare.CONCLUSIONS: The intervention programme was effective in reducing depressive symptoms, and valuable lessons can be learned from this implementation trial. Given the low uptake and high investment, we advise against routine screening for depressive symptoms in general healthcare

BACKGROUND: Depressive symptoms are highly prevalent in old age, but they remain mostly untreated. Several clinical trials have shown promising results in preventing or reducing depressive symptoms. However, it is not clear how robust these effects are in the real world of day-to-day care. Therefore, we have implemented the 'Lust for Life' programme, which significantly reduced depressive symptoms in community-dwelling older adults in the first three months after implementation. This mixed-methods study was conducted alongside the trial to develop a contextualised understanding of factors affecting the implementation.METHODS: A total of 263 persons of 65 years and older with depressive symptoms were recruited from 18 general practices and home care organizations in the Netherlands. We used qualitative data (in-depth interviews and focus group discussions with participants with depressive symptoms and healthcare professionals) as well as quantitative data (longitudinal data on the severity of depressive symptoms) to explore hindering and facilitating factors to the implementation of the 'Lust for Life' programme.RESULTS: The uptake of the routine screening was poor and imposed significant burdens on participants and healthcare professionals, and drop-out rates were high. Participants' perceived mental problems and need for care played a key role in their decision to participate in the programme and to step up to consequent interventions. Older people preferred interventions that focused on interpersonal contact. The programme was only effective when delivered by mental healthcare nurses, compared to home care nurses with limited experience in providing mental healthcare.CONCLUSIONS: The intervention programme was effective in reducing depressive symptoms, and valuable lessons can be learned from this implementation trial. Given the low uptake and high investment, we advise against routine screening for depressive symptoms in general healthcare

BACKGROUND: Mental health problems are common and are associated with increased disability and health care costs. Problem-Solving Treatment (PST) delivered to these patients by nurses in primary care might be efficient. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of PST by mental health nurses compared with usual care (UC) by the general practitioner for primary care patients with mental health problems.METHODS: An economic evaluation from a societal perspective was performed alongside a randomized clinical trial. Patients with a positive General Health Questionnaire score (score ≥ 4) and who visited their general practitioner at least three times during the past 6 months were eligible. Outcome measures were improvement on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and QALYs based on the EQ-5D. Resource use was measured using a validated questionnaire. Missing cost and effect data were imputed using multiple imputation techniques. Bootstrapping was used to analyze costs and cost-effectiveness of PST compared with UC.RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in clinical outcomes at 9 months. Mean total costs were €4795 in the PST group and €6857 in the UC group. Costs were not statistically significantly different between the two groups (95% CI -4698;359). The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that PST was cost-effective in comparison with UC. Sensitivity analyses confirmed these findings.CONCLUSIONS: PST delivered by nurses seems cost-effective in comparison with UC. However, these results should be interpreted with caution, since the difference in total costs was mainly caused by 3 outliers with extremely high indirect costs in the UC group.TRIAL REGISTRATION: Nederlands Trial Register ISRCTN51021015.

BACKGROUND: Mental health problems are common and are associated with increased disability and health care costs. Problem-Solving Treatment (PST) delivered to these patients by nurses in primary care might be efficient. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of PST by mental health nurses compared with usual care (UC) by the general practitioner for primary care patients with mental health problems.METHODS: An economic evaluation from a societal perspective was performed alongside a randomized clinical trial. Patients with a positive General Health Questionnaire score (score ≥ 4) and who visited their general practitioner at least three times during the past 6 months were eligible. Outcome measures were improvement on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and QALYs based on the EQ-5D. Resource use was measured using a validated questionnaire. Missing cost and effect data were imputed using multiple imputation techniques. Bootstrapping was used to analyze costs and cost-effectiveness of PST compared with UC.RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in clinical outcomes at 9 months. Mean total costs were €4795 in the PST group and €6857 in the UC group. Costs were not statistically significantly different between the two groups (95% CI -4698;359). The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that PST was cost-effective in comparison with UC. Sensitivity analyses confirmed these findings.CONCLUSIONS: PST delivered by nurses seems cost-effective in comparison with UC. However, these results should be interpreted with caution, since the difference in total costs was mainly caused by 3 outliers with extremely high indirect costs in the UC group.TRIAL REGISTRATION: Nederlands Trial Register ISRCTN51021015.