Cost Utility of cognition-enhancing interventions for individuals with first-episode psychosis: a naturalistic evaluation.
Cognition
Cognitive remediation
Coordinated specialty care
Cost utility
First-episode psychosis
Journal
Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E
ISSN: 1478-7547
Titre abrégé: Cost Eff Resour Alloc
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101170476
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Jul 2021
01 Jul 2021
Historique:
received:
23
12
2020
accepted:
19
06
2021
entrez:
2
7
2021
pubmed:
3
7
2021
medline:
3
7
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Although effective treatments are available to address the cognitive deficits experienced by individuals with first-episode psychosis, provision of such treatments within Coordinated Specialty Care (CSC) programs is rare. One factor that may contribute to this is uncertainty about the cost implications of providing cognitive-enhancing treatments within the American mental healthcare system. The aim of this study is to complete a naturalistic evaluation of the cost utility of incorporating two different cognitive-enhancing interventions within an American CSC program. Participants included 66, predominately white (75.38%), individuals with first-episode psychosis (19 women and 47 men) with a mean age of 22.71 years. Quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and cost of care were tracked among these individuals during their participation in a CSC program. These data were compared among three groups of participants during their first six months of care: (i) individuals who participated in metacognitive remediation therapy (MCR), (ii) individuals who participated in computerized cognitive remediation (CCR), and (iii) individuals who participated in no cognitive-enhancing intervention. Participation in MCR, but not CCR, was associated with larger gains in QALYs than participation in no cognitive-enhancing intervention within a CSC program. Moreover, data support the cost utility of MCR as compared to CCR or no-cognitive enhancing intervention within a CSC program. Conversely, CCR did not appear to be a cost-effective addition to CSC services. Our results highlight the potential cost utility of incorporating MCR within CSC programs for individuals with first-episode psychosis. However, given study limitations, these results should be interpreted cautiously until replicated by large, randomized controlled trials. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01570972, registered April 4, 2012, Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01570972?term=breitborde&draw=2&rank=6 .
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Although effective treatments are available to address the cognitive deficits experienced by individuals with first-episode psychosis, provision of such treatments within Coordinated Specialty Care (CSC) programs is rare. One factor that may contribute to this is uncertainty about the cost implications of providing cognitive-enhancing treatments within the American mental healthcare system. The aim of this study is to complete a naturalistic evaluation of the cost utility of incorporating two different cognitive-enhancing interventions within an American CSC program.
METHODS
METHODS
Participants included 66, predominately white (75.38%), individuals with first-episode psychosis (19 women and 47 men) with a mean age of 22.71 years. Quality adjusted life years (QALYs) and cost of care were tracked among these individuals during their participation in a CSC program. These data were compared among three groups of participants during their first six months of care: (i) individuals who participated in metacognitive remediation therapy (MCR), (ii) individuals who participated in computerized cognitive remediation (CCR), and (iii) individuals who participated in no cognitive-enhancing intervention.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Participation in MCR, but not CCR, was associated with larger gains in QALYs than participation in no cognitive-enhancing intervention within a CSC program. Moreover, data support the cost utility of MCR as compared to CCR or no-cognitive enhancing intervention within a CSC program. Conversely, CCR did not appear to be a cost-effective addition to CSC services.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our results highlight the potential cost utility of incorporating MCR within CSC programs for individuals with first-episode psychosis. However, given study limitations, these results should be interpreted cautiously until replicated by large, randomized controlled trials. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01570972, registered April 4, 2012, Retrospectively registered, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01570972?term=breitborde&draw=2&rank=6 .
Identifiants
pubmed: 34210341
doi: 10.1186/s12962-021-00292-6
pii: 10.1186/s12962-021-00292-6
pmc: PMC8247178
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT01570972']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
36Subventions
Organisme : Institute for Mental Health Research
ID : N/A
Références
Early Interv Psychiatry. 2017 Jun;11(3):244-249
pubmed: 26472632
Schizophr Res. 2003 Jun 1;61(2-3):163-74
pubmed: 12729868
Annu Rev Psychol. 2009;60:549-76
pubmed: 18652544
Schizophr Res. 2017 Jun;184:147-149
pubmed: 27989644
Schizophr Res. 2010 Jul;120(1-3):217-24
pubmed: 20056391
Am J Psychiatry. 1996 Mar;153(3):321-30
pubmed: 8610818
J Health Econ. 2007 May 1;26(3):597-612
pubmed: 17069909
Br J Psychiatry. 1990 Dec;157:853-9
pubmed: 2289094
Am J Psychiatry. 2008 Feb;165(2):203-13
pubmed: 18172019
Health Econ. 1993 Oct;2(3):217-27
pubmed: 8275167
Psychiatr Serv. 1999 May;50(5):641-7
pubmed: 10332899
Psychiatr Serv. 2015 Jul;66(7):691-8
pubmed: 25772764
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2008 Apr;8(2):165-78
pubmed: 20528406
Biol Psychiatry. 2005 Mar 15;57(6):688-91
pubmed: 15780858
Am J Psychiatry. 2011 May;168(5):472-85
pubmed: 21406461
Psychol Med. 2013 Jun;43(6):1161-73
pubmed: 23237010
Schizophr Bull. 2016 Jul;42(4):896-906
pubmed: 26834024
Schizophr Res. 2000 Jul 7;44(1):1-10
pubmed: 10867307
Br J Psychiatry. 2005 Aug;187:106-8
pubmed: 16055820
Schizophr Res. 2013 May;146(1-3):64-8
pubmed: 23422728
Value Health. 2008 Sep-Oct;11(5):886-97
pubmed: 18489513
Psychiatr Serv. 2015 Jul;66(7):705-12
pubmed: 25639994
Early Interv Psychiatry. 2009 Nov;3(4):259-65
pubmed: 22642728
Am J Psychiatry. 2006 Dec;163(12):2080-9
pubmed: 17151158
BMC Psychiatry. 2015 Oct 28;15:266
pubmed: 26511605
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2012 Jul;46(7):681-2
pubmed: 22735639
Schizophr Res. 2017 Apr;182:2-3
pubmed: 28318837
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1995 Aug;52(8):679-87
pubmed: 7632121
Am J Psychiatry. 2016 Apr 1;173(4):362-72
pubmed: 26481174
J Health Econ. 2002 Mar;21(2):271-92
pubmed: 11939242
Psychiatry Res. 2017 Aug;254:198-204
pubmed: 28463718
Clin Trials. 2007;4(2):154-61
pubmed: 17456514
Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2017 Apr 27;10:119-128
pubmed: 28490910
Psychol Res Behav Manag. 2018 Sep 05;11:341-351
pubmed: 30233262