Lee, Yong Yi, Mihalopoulos, Cathrine, Chatterton, Mary Lou, Fletcher, Susan L, Chondros, Patty, Densley, Konstancja, Murray, Elizabeth, Dowrick, Christopher, Coe, Amy, Hegarty, Kelsey L et al (show 4 more authors)
(2022)
Economic evaluation of the Target-D platform to match depression management to severity prognosis in primary care: A within-trial cost-utility analysis.
PloS one, 17 (5).
e0268948-e0268948.
Abstract
<h4>Background</h4>Target-D, a new person-centred e-health platform matching depression care to symptom severity prognosis (minimal/mild, moderate or severe) has demonstrated greater improvement in depressive symptoms than usual care plus attention control. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of Target-D compared to usual care from a health sector and partial societal perspective across 3-month and 12-month follow-up.<h4>Methods and findings</h4>A cost-utility analysis was conducted alongside the Target-D randomised controlled trial; which involved 1,868 participants attending 14 general practices in metropolitan Melbourne, Australia. Data on costs were collected using a resource use questionnaire administered concurrently with all other outcome measures at baseline, 3-month and 12-month follow-up. Intervention costs were assessed using financial records compiled during the trial. All costs were expressed in Australian dollars (A$) for the 2018-19 financial year. QALY outcomes were derived using the Assessment of Quality of Life-8D (AQoL-8D) questionnaire. On a per person basis, the Target-D intervention cost between $14 (minimal/mild prognostic group) and $676 (severe group). Health sector and societal costs were not significantly different between trial arms at both 3 and 12 months. Relative to a A$50,000 per QALY willingness-to-pay threshold, the probability of Target-D being cost-effective under a health sector perspective was 81% at 3 months and 96% at 12 months. From a societal perspective, the probability of cost-effectiveness was 30% at 3 months and 80% at 12 months.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Target-D is likely to represent good value for money for health care decision makers. Further evaluation of QALY outcomes should accompany any routine roll-out to assess comparability of results to those observed in the trial. This trial is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12616000537459).
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Humans, Prognosis, Depression, Quality-Adjusted Life Years, Quality of Life, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Primary Health Care, Australia |
| Divisions: | Faculty of Health and Life Sciences Faculty of Health and Life Sciences > Institute of Population Health |
| Depositing User: | Symplectic Admin |
| Date Deposited: | 15 Sep 2022 09:02 |
| Last Modified: | 18 Jan 2023 20:41 |
| DOI: | 10.1371/journal.pone.0268948 |
| Open Access URL: | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268948 |
| Related URLs: | |
| URI: | https://livrepository.liverpool.ac.uk/id/eprint/3164790 |
Dimensions
Dimensions
