Cost-Effectiveness of Digital Mental Health Versus Usual Care During Humanitarian Crises in Lebanon: Pragmatic Randomized Trial.
Lebanese
Lebanon
Syrian
anxiety
depression
digital health
digital mental health
economic evaluation
effectiveness
internet-based intervention
large randomized controlled trial
mental health
stress-related disorders
symptoms
treatment
usual care
Journal
JMIR mental health
ISSN: 2368-7959
Titre abrégé: JMIR Ment Health
Pays: Canada
ID NLM: 101658926
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 May 2024
29 May 2024
Historique:
received:
16
12
2023
accepted:
08
04
2024
revised:
22
03
2024
medline:
29
5
2024
pubmed:
29
5
2024
entrez:
29
5
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
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. RR2-10.2196/21585.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
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.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
This study aims to assess the cost-effectiveness of SbS in a randomized comparison with enhanced usual care (EUC).
METHODS
METHODS
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.
RESULTS
RESULTS
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.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
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.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
BACKGROUND
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03720769; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03720769.
INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)
UNASSIGNED
RR2-10.2196/21585.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38810255
pii: v11i1e55544
doi: 10.2196/55544
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT03720769']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Pragmatic Clinical Trial
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e55544Informations de copyright
©Racha Abi Hana, Jinane Abi Ramia, Sebastian Burchert, Kenneth Carswell, Pim Cuijpers, Eva Heim, Christine Knaevelsrud, Philip Noun, Marit Sijbrandij, Mark van Ommeren, Edith van’t Hof, Ben Wijnen, Edwina Zoghbi, Rabih El Chammay, Filip Smit. Originally published in JMIR Mental Health (https://mental.jmir.org), 29.05.2024.