Background: Collaborative care is an effective treatment for the management of depression but evidence on its cost-effectiveness in the UK is lacking.

Aims: To assess the cost-effectiveness of collaborative care in a UK primary care setting.

Methods: An economic evaluation alongside a multi-centre cluster randomised controlled trial comparing collaborative care with usual primary care for adults with depression (n = 581). Costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated over a 12-month follow-up, from the perspective of the UK National Health Service and Personal Social Services (i.e. Third Party Payer). Sensitivity analyses are reported, and uncertainty is presented using the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC) and the cost-effectiveness plane.

Results: The collaborative care intervention had a mean cost of £272.50 per participant. Health and social care service use, excluding collaborative care, indicated a similar profile of resource use between collaborative care and usual care participants. Collaborative care offered a mean incremental gain of 0.02 (95% CI: -0.02, 0.06) quality-adjusted life-years over 12 months, at a mean incremental cost of £270.72 (95% CI: -202.98, 886.04), and resulted in an estimated mean cost per QALY of £14,248. Where costs associated with informal care are considered in sensitivity analyses collaborative care is expected to be less costly and more effective, thereby dominating treatment as usual.

Conclusion: Collaborative care offers health gains at a relatively low cost, and is cost-effective compared with usual care against a decision-maker willingness to pay threshold of £20,000 per QALY gained. Results here support the commissioning of collaborative care in a UK primary care setting.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4133193PMC
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0104225PLOS

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

collaborative care
44
care
19
primary care
16
collaborative
10
cost-effectiveness collaborative
8
economic evaluation
8
randomised controlled
8
controlled trial
8
care primary
8
care usual
8

Similar Publications

Background: To successfully design, develop, implement, and deliver digital health services that provide value, they should be cocreated with patients. However, occasionally, the value may also be codestructed. In the field of health care, the concepts of value cocreation and codestruction still need to be better established within emerging digital health services.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Purpose: Transurethral resection of bladder tumor (TURBT) is the initial staging procedure for new bladder cancers (BCs). For muscle-invasive bladder cancers (MIBCs), TURBT may delay definitive treatment. We investigated whether definitive treatment can be expedited for MIBC using flexible cystoscopic biopsy and multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) for initial staging.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Objective: Blood urea nitrogen (BUN) is a commonly used biomarker for assessing kidney function and neuroendocrine activity. Previous studies have indicated that elevated BUN levels are associated with increased mortality in various critically ill patient populations. The focus of this study was to investigate the relationship between BUN and 28-day mortality in intensive care patients.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Health system resilience is defined as the ability of a system to prepare, manage, and learn from shocks. This study investigates the resilience of the German health system by analysing the system-related factors that supported health care workers, a key building block of the system, during the COVID-19 pandemic. We thematically analysed data from 18 semi-structured interviews with key informants from management, policy and academia, 17 in-depth interviews with health care workers, and 10 focus group discussions with health care workers.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Implementation of a data-driven quality improvement program in primary care for patients with coronary heart disease: a mixed methods evaluation of acceptability, satisfaction, barriers and enablers.

Aust J Prim Health

January 2025

School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia; and The George Institute for Global Health, University of New South Wales, Barangaroo, NSW, Australia.

Background The study aimed to understand the acceptability, satisfaction, uptake, utility and feasibility of a quality improvement (QI) intervention to improve care for coronary heart disease (CHD) patients in Australian primary care practices and identify barriers and enablers, including the impact of COVID-19. Methods Within the QUality improvement for Effectiveness of care for people Living with heart disease (QUEL) study, 26 Australian primary care practices, supported by five Primary Health Networks (PHN) participated in a 1-year QI intervention (November 2019 - November 2020). Data were collected from practices and PHNs staff via surveys and semi-structured interviews.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!