Dataset Information

Protocol investigating the clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of cognitive-behavioural therapy delivered remotely for unscheduled care users with health anxiety: randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Health anxiety and medically unexplained symptoms cost the National Health Service (NHS) an estimated £3 billion per year in unnecessary costs with little evidence of patient benefit. Effective treatment is rarely taken up due to issues such as stigma or previous negative experiences with mental health services. An approach to overcome this might be to offer remotely delivered psychological therapy, which can be just as effective as face-to-face therapy and may be more accessible and suitable.

Aims

To investigate the clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of remotely delivered cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) to people with high health anxiety repeatedly accessing unscheduled care (trial registration: NCT02298036).

Method

A multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) will be undertaken in primary and secondary care providers of unscheduled care across the East Midlands. One hundred and forty-four eligible participants will be equally randomised to receive either remote CBT (6-12 sessions) or treatment as usual (TAU). Two doctoral research studies will investigate the barriers and facilitators to delivering the intervention and the factors contributing to the optimisation of therapeutic outcome.

Results

This trial will be the first to test the clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of remotely delivered CBT for the treatment of high health anxiety.

Conclusions

The findings will enable an understanding as to how this intervention might fit into a wider care pathway to enhance patient experience of care.

Declaration of interest

None.

Copyright and usage

SUBMITTER: Patel S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4995569 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Protocol investigating the clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of cognitive-behavioural therapy delivered remotely for unscheduled care users with health anxiety: randomised controlled trial.

Patel Shireen S Malins Sam S Guo Boliang B James Marilyn M Kai Joe J Kaylor-Hughes Catherine C Rowley Emma E Simpson Jayne J Smart David D Stubley Michelle M Tyrer Helen H Morriss Richard R

BJPsych open 20160101 1

<h4>Background</h4>Health anxiety and medically unexplained symptoms cost the National Health Service (NHS) an estimated £3 billion per year in unnecessary costs with little evidence of patient benefit. Effective treatment is rarely taken up due to issues such as stigma or previous negative experiences with mental health services. An approach to overcome this might be to offer remotely delivered psychological therapy, which can be just as effective as face-to-face therapy and may be more accessi ...[more]

PMID: 27703758

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIt is challenging to engage repeat users of unscheduled healthcare with severe health anxiety in psychological help and high service costs are incurred. We investigated whether clinical and economic outcomes were improved by offering remote cognitive behaviour therapy (RCBT) using videoconferencing or telephone compared to treatment as usual (TAU).MethodsA single-blind, parallel group, multicentre randomised controlled trial was undertaken in primary and general hospital care. Participants were aged ≥18 years with ≥2 unscheduled healthcare contacts within 12 months and scored >18 on the Health Anxiety Inventory. Randomisation to RCBT or TAU was stratified by site, with allocation conveyed to a trial administrator, research assessors masked to outcome. Data were collected at baseline, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. The primary outcome was change in HAI score from baseline to six months on an intention-to-treat basis. Secondary outcomes were generalised anxiety, depression, physical symptoms, function and overall health. Health economics analysis was conducted from a health service and societal perspective.ResultsOf the 524 patients who were referred and assessed for trial eligibility, 470 were eligible and 156 (33%) were recruited; 78 were randomised to TAU and 78 to RCBT. Compared to TAU, RCBT significantly reduced health anxiety at six months, maintained to 9 and 12 months (mean change difference HAI -2.81; 95% CI -5.11 to -0.50; P = 0.017). Generalised anxiety, depression and overall health was significantly improved at 12 months, but there was no significant change in physical symptoms or function. RCBT was strictly dominant with a net monetary benefit of £3,164 per participant at a willingness to pay threshold of £30,000. No treatment-related adverse events were reported in either group.ConclusionsRCBT may reduce health anxiety, general anxiety and depression and improve overall health, with considerable reductions in health and informal care costs in repeat users of unscheduled care with severe health anxiety who have previously been difficult to engage in psychological treatment. RCBT may be an easy-to-implement intervention to improve clinical outcome and save costs in one group of repeat users of unscheduled care.Trial registrationThe trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov on 19 Nov 2014 with reference number NCT02298036.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Half of all lifetime anxiety disorders emerge before age 12 years; however, access to evidence-based psychological therapies for affected children is poor. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of two brief psychological treatments for children with anxiety referred to routine child mental health settings. We hypothesised that brief guided parent-delivered cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) would be associated with better clinical outcomes than solution-focused brief therapy and would be cost-effective. METHODS:We did this randomised controlled trial at four National Health Service primary child and mental health services in Oxfordshire, UK. Children aged 5-12 years referred for anxiety difficulties were randomly allocated (1:1), via a secure online minimisation tool, to receive brief guided parent-delivered CBT or solution-focused brief therapy, with minimisation for age, sex, anxiety severity, and level of parental anxiety. The allocation sequence was not accessible to the researcher enrolling participants or to study assessors. Research staff who obtained outcome measurements were masked to group allocation and clinical staff who delivered the intervention did not measure outcomes. The primary outcome was recovery, on the basis of Clinical Global Impressions of Improvement (CGI-I). Parents recorded patient-level resource use. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for use in cost-utility analysis were derived from the Child Health Utility 9D. Assessments were done at baseline (before randomisation), after treatment (primary endpoint), and 6 months after treatment completion. We did analysis by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the ISCRTN registry, number ISRCTN07627865. FINDINGS:Between March 23, 2012, and March 31, 2014, we randomly assigned 136 patients to receive brief guided parent-delivered CBT (n=68) or solution-focused brief therapy (n=68). At the primary endpoint assessment (June, 2012, to September, 2014), 40 (59%) children in the brief guided parent-delivered CBT group versus 47 (69%) children in the solution-focused brief therapy group had an improvement of much or very much in CGI-I score, with no significant differences between groups in either clinical (CGI-I: relative risk 1·01, 95% CI 0·86-1·19; p=0·95) or economic (QALY: mean difference 0·006, -0·009 to 0·02; p=0·42) outcome measures. However, brief guided parent-delivered CBT was associated with lower costs (mean difference -£448; 95% CI -934 to 37; p=0·070) and, taking into account sampling uncertainty, was likely to represent a cost-effective use of resources compared with solution-focused brief therapy. No treatment-related or trial-related adverse events were reported in either group. INTERPRETATION:Our findings show no evidence of clinical superiority of brief guided parent-delivered CBT. However, guided parent-delivered CBT is likely to be a cost-effective alternative to solution-focused brief therapy and might be considered as a first-line treatment for children with anxiety problems. FUNDING:National Institute for Health Research.

Project description:BackgroundIncreasing evidence supports the merits of speech therapy in Parkinson's disease, but the current practice of multiple in-house treatments is demanding for patients. We therefore assessed the effectiveness of remotely delivered and personalised speech therapy on improving quality of life and speech quality in persons with Parkinson's disease.MethodsWe performed a single blinded randomised controlled trial (the PERSPECTIVE study), comparing 8 weeks of personalised remote speech therapy to no intervention (waiting list design). Patients with reduced speech intelligibility were included, regardless of disease stage or dysarthria severity. Patients were assigned randomly (1:1) to the intervention or control group. Measurements took place at baseline and after 8 weeks (both groups), and after 32 weeks (intervention group only). Patients were treated remotely by 20 experienced speech therapists. The primary outcome was disease-related quality of life at 8 weeks, assessed with the Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire 39 (PDQ-39). Data were analysed using analysis of covariance based on the intention-to-treat principle. This trial is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03963388.FindingsBetween March 1, 2019, and March 27, 2021, 214 patients were enrolled in the intervention group (n = 109) or control group (n = 105). At the primary timepoint, the adjusted mean difference in PDQ-39 was -2.0 in favour of the intervention group (95% CI -4.0 to 0.1); p = 0.056). The intervention group scored better on the communication index score of the PDQ-39 (post hoc analysis), with an adjusted mean difference of -5.3 (95% CI -9.4 to -1.2; p = 0.011). We found no between-group differences on any other PDQ-39 domain. Follow-up measurements showed a significant reduction of the PDQ-39 compared to the primary timepoint with a difference of 2.40 (95% CI 0.77-4.02; p = 0.004).InterpretationPersonalised remote speech therapy improved communication-related quality of life, but not overall quality of life.FundingMichael J. Fox Foundation, Gatsby Foundation, and Health∼Holland.

Project description:BackgroundHealth anxiety is a prevalent and debilitating disorder associated with extensive use of healthcare services and reduced quality of life (QoL). Regional variability in specialised clinics or specialist healthcare providers limits access to evidence-based treatment, which may be overcome by internet-delivered Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (iACT).ObjectiveThis study investigated the cost effectiveness of iACT for severe health anxiety in adults.MethodsBased on a Danish randomised controlled trial (March 2016-March 2017), the economic evaluation compared costs and effects between iACT and an active control condition (iFORUM). Effectiveness was measured using self-report questionnaires. The cost analysis applied a societal perspective. Resource use and healthcare costs were extracted from the Danish National Registries. Linear regression analysis was applied using change in costs/effectiveness outcomes as the dependant variable. Time, group, and interaction between time and group were independent variables. The primary outcome was the proportion of clinically significant improvements, defined as a ≥ 25% reduction in two measures of health anxiety. The probability of cost effectiveness was presented in a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve for a range of threshold values for willingness to pay.ResultsNo significant differences were detected in healthcare costs between groups; however, the iACT group significantly improved in all effectiveness outcomes. The economic analysis showed that, from the healthcare perspective, iACT was associated with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of €33 per additional case of clinically significant improvement compared with iFORUM and that, from the societal perspective, iACT dominated iFORUM because it was more effective and less expensive.ConclusionsWe found no statistically significant differences in costs between groups; however, iACT for severe health anxiety may be cost effective, as evidenced by significant differences in effect.Trial registry numberClinicaltrials.gov, no. NCT02735434.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To assess whether exposure-based internet-delivered cognitive-behavioural therapy (internet-CBT) is a cost-effective treatment for adolescents with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) compared with a waitlist control, from a societal perspective, based on data from a randomised trial. DESIGN:Within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis. SETTING:Participants were recruited from the whole of Sweden via primary, secondary and tertiary care clinics reached through news media and advertising. PARTICIPANTS:Adolescents (aged 13-17) with a diagnosis of IBS. INTERVENTIONS:Participants were randomised to either an exposure-based internet-CBT, including 10 weekly modules for adolescents and five modules for parents, or a waitlist. OUTCOME MEASURES:The main health outcome was the quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) estimated by mapping Pediatric Quality-of-Life Inventory (PedsQL) scores onto EQ-5D-3L utilities. The secondary outcome was the point improvement on the PedsQL scale. Data on health outcomes and resource use were collected at baseline and 10 weeks post-treatment. Resource use was measured using the Trimbos and Institute of Medical Technology Assessment Cost Questionnaire for Psychiatry (TIC-P) . Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated as the difference in average costs by the difference in average outcomes between groups. RESULTS:The base-case results showed that internet-CBT costs were on average US$170.24 (95% CI 63.14 to 315.04) more per participant than the waitlist. Adolescents in the internet-CBT group showed small QALY gains (0.0031; 95% CI 0.0003 to 0.0061), and an average improvement of 5.647 points (95% CI 1.82 to 9.46) on the PedsQL compared with the waitlist. Internet-CBT yielded an ICER of $54 916/QALY gained and a probability of cost-effectiveness of 74% given the Swedish willingness-to-pay threshold. The ICER for the outcome PedsQL was US$85.29/point improvement. CONCLUSIONS:Offering internet-CBT to adolescents with IBS improves health-related quality of life and generates small QALY gains at a higher cost than a waitlist control. Internet-CBT is thus likely to be cost-effective given the strong efficacy evidence, small QALY gains and low cost. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT02306369; Results.

Project description:IntroductionDepression is three to four times more prevalent in autistic people and is related to reduced quality of life. There is a need for empirically supported psychological interventions for depression specifically adapted to meet the needs of autistic adults. ADEPT-2 aims to establish the clinical and cost-effectiveness of an adapted low-intensity psychological intervention (guided self-help) for depression in autistic adults.Methods and analysisA two parallel-group multicentre pragmatic randomised controlled trial investigating the effectiveness of GSH for depression in autistic adults. Participants (n=248) aged ≥18 years with a clinical diagnosis of autism currently experiencing depression will be randomised to GSH or treatment as usual (TAU). GSH is a low-intensity psychological intervention based on the principles of behavioural activation adapted for autism. GSH comprises informational materials for nine individual sessions facilitated online by a GSH coach who has received training and supervision in delivering the intervention. The primary outcome will be Beck Depression Inventory-II depression scores at 16 weeks post randomisation with follow-up measures at 32 and 52 weeks. Additional measures of anxiety, patient-rated global improvement, quality of life, work and social adjustment, positive and negative affect will be measured 16 and 52 weeks post randomisation. The primary health economic analysis will assess the cost-effectiveness of GSH compared with TAU over 52 weeks, from a societal perspective including the National Health Service, personal social services, personal expenses, voluntary services and productivity. An embedded qualitative study will explore the acceptability, experiences and adherence of participants and therapists to treatment principles.Ethics and disseminationThis trial has been approved by the East of England - Essex Research Ethics Committee on 10 June 2022 (REC Reference number: 22/EE/0091). The findings of the research will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated in an appropriate format to trial participants and the wider public.Trial registration numberISRCTN17547011.

Project description:IntroductionCrisis resolution teams (CRTs) provide assessment and intensive home treatment in a crisis, aiming to offer an alternative for people who would otherwise require a psychiatric inpatient admission. They are available in most areas in England. Despite some evidence for their clinical and cost-effectiveness, recurrent concerns are expressed regarding discontinuity with other services and lack of focus on preventing future relapse and readmission to acute care. Currently evidence on how to prevent readmissions to acute care is limited. Self-management interventions, involving supporting service users in recognising and managing signs of their own illness and in actively planning their recovery, have some supporting evidence, but have not been tested as a means of preventing readmission to acute care in people leaving community crisis care. We thus proposed the current study to test the effectiveness of such an intervention. We selected peer support workers as the preferred staff to deliver such an intervention, as they are well-placed to model and encourage active and autonomous recovery from mental health problems.Methods and analysisThe CORE (CRT Optimisation and Relapse Prevention) self-management trial compares the effectiveness of a peer-provided self-management intervention for people leaving CRT care, with treatment as usual supplemented by a booklet on self-management. The planned sample is 440 participants, including 40 participants in an internal pilot. The primary outcome measure is whether participants are readmitted to acute care over 1 year of follow-up following entry to the trial. Secondary outcomes include self-rated recovery at 4 and at 18 months following trial entry, measured using the Questionnaire on the Process of Recovery. Analysis will follow an intention to treatment principle. Random effects logistic regression modelling with adjustment for clustering by peer support worker will be used to test the primary hypothesis.Ethics and disseminationThe CORE self-management trial was approved by the London Camden and Islington Research Ethics Committee (REC ref: 12/LO/0988). A Trial Steering Committee and Data Monitoring Committee oversee the progress of the study. We will report on the results of the clinical trial, as well as on the characteristics of the participants and their associations with relapse.Trial registration numberISRCTN 01027104;pre-results stage.

Project description:ObjectivesInternet-delivered exposure-based cognitive behaviour therapy (ICBT) has been shown to be effective in the treatment of severe health anxiety. The health economic effects of the treatment have, however, been insufficiently studied and no prior study has investigated the effect of ICBT compared with an active psychological treatment. The aim of the present study was to investigate the cost effectiveness of ICBT compared with internet-delivered behavioural stress management (IBSM) for adults with severe health anxiety defined as Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) hypochondriasis. ICBT was hypothesised to be the more cost-effective treatment.SettingThis was a cost-effectiveness study within the context of a randomised controlled trial conducted in a primary care/university setting. Participants from all of Sweden could apply to participate.ParticipantsSelf-referred adults (N=158) with a principal diagnosis of DSM-IV hypochondriasis, of whom 151 (96%) provided baseline and post-treatment data.InterventionsICBT or IBSM for 12 weeks.Primary and secondary measuresThe primary outcome was the Health Anxiety Inventory. The secondary outcome was the EQ-5D. Other secondary measures were used in the main outcome study but were not relevant for the present health economic analysis.ResultsBoth treatments led to significant reductions in gross total costs, costs of healthcare visits, direct non-medical costs and costs of domestic work cutback (p=0.000-0.035). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) indicated that the cost of one additional case of clinically significant improvement in ICBT compared with IBSM was $2214. The cost-utility ICER, that is, the cost of one additional quality-adjusted life year, was estimated to be $10,000.ConclusionsICBT is a cost-effective treatment compared with IBSM and treatment costs are offset by societal net cost reductions in a short time. A cost-benefit analysis speaks for ICBT to play an important role in increasing access to effective treatment for severe health anxiety.Trial registration numberNCT01673035; Results.

Dataset Information

Protocol investigating the clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of cognitive-behavioural therapy delivered remotely for unscheduled care users with health anxiety: randomised controlled trial.

Background

Aims

Method

Results

Conclusions

Declaration of interest

Copyright and usage

Publications

Protocol investigating the clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of cognitive-behavioural therapy delivered remotely for unscheduled care users with health anxiety: randomised controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets