Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Objective: Despite its high prevalence, cancer-related insomnia typically remains untreated because of a lack of access to cognitive-behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I), the treatment of choice for this condition. While face-to-face CBT-I appears to be optimal in terms of efficacy, self-administered formats may be more cost-effective. The goal of this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial was to compare the cost-effectiveness of a professionally-based CBT-I (PCBT-I) to that of a video-based CBT-I (VCBT-I).
Methods: A total of 161 women with breast cancer received six weekly, individual CBT-I sessions (PCBT-I; n = 81) or a 60-minutes animated video +6 short booklets (VCBT-I; n = 80). Participants completed the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) and provided information to calculate treatment costs.
Results: Total per patient treatment costs were 5.5 times greater for PCBT-I ($1298.90) than VCBT-I ($234.36; P < .0001). Both at posttreatment and 3-month follow-up, the ISI reduction was greater in PCBT-I than VCBT-I, but these differences were not significant (P = .09 and P = .24, respectively). In contrast, the cost-effectiveness ratio was significantly more advantageous for VCBT-I than PCBT-I. Compared to VCBT-I, each reduction of 1 unit on the ISI produced by PCBT-I was associated with a treatment cost that was significantly greater at posttreatment ($186.95 CAD vs $44.87 CAD; P = .001) and follow-up ($154.76 vs $24.97, P = .005).
Conclusions: Although CBT-I is slightly less efficacious when self-administered, it constitutes a much more cost-effective alternative than face-to-face CBT-I and represents an extremely valuable option in settings where monetary and human resources required to administer CBT-I are not available or sufficient.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pon.5532 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!