Article

Randomised controlled trial of non-directive counselling, cognitive-behaviour therapy, and usual general practitioner care for patients with depression. II: Cost effectiveness

National Primary Care Research and Development Centre (NPCRDC), University of Manchester, UK.
BMJ Clinical Research (Impact Factor: 14.09). 01/2001; 321(7273):1389-92. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.321.7273.1389
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To compare the cost effectiveness of general practitioner care and two general practice based psychological therapies for depressed patients.
Prospective, controlled trial with randomised and patient preference allocation arms.
General practices in London and greater Manchester.
464 of 627 patients presenting with depression or mixed anxiety and depression were suitable for inclusion.
Usual general practitioner care or up to 12 sessions of non-directive counselling or cognitive-behaviour therapy provided by therapists.
Beck depression inventory scores, EuroQol measure of health related quality of life, direct treatment and non-treatment costs, and cost of lost production.
197 patients were randomly assigned to treatment, 137 chose their treatment, and 130 were randomised only between the two psychological therapies. At four months, both non-directive counselling and cognitive-behaviour therapy reduced depressive symptoms to a significantly greater extent than usual general practitioner care. There was no significant difference in outcome between treatments at 12 months. There were no significant differences in direct costs, production losses, or societal costs between the three treatments at either four or 12 months. Sensitivity analyses did not suggest that the results depended on particular assumptions in the statistical analysis.
Within the constraints of available power, the data suggest that both brief psychological therapies may be significantly more cost effective than usual care in the short term, as benefit was gained with no significant difference in cost. There are no significant differences between treatments in either outcomes or costs at 12 months.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Michael B King, Aug 03, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
86 Views
  • Source
    • "Not surprisingly, psychological approaches such as CBT have been particularly effective in treating depression in medical patients who need help addressing maladaptive beliefs about their illness that initiate and maintain depression (Bower et al., 2000; Kessler et al., 2009; Serfaty et al., 2009; Ward et al., 2000). Most studies in primary care patients have compared CBTwith control conditions such as " usual care " by the physician, a " talking control " condition, or alternative forms of therapy such as nondirective counseling (Bower et al., 2000; Katon et al., 1996; Kessler et al., 2009; Serfaty et al., 2009; Ward et al., 2000). Head-to-head comparisons of varying forms of CBT are rare. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We examine the efficacy of conventional cognitive behavioral therapy (CCBT) versus religiously integrated CBT (RCBT) in persons with major depression and chronic medical illness. Participants were randomized to either CCBT (n = 67) or RCBT (n = 65). The intervention in both groups consisted of ten 50-minute sessions delivered remotely during 12 weeks (94% by telephone). Adherence to treatment was similar, except in more religious participants in whom adherence to RCBT was slightly greater (85.7% vs. 65.9%, p = 0.10). The intention-to-treat analysis at 12 weeks indicated no significant difference in outcome between the two groups (B = 0.33; SE, 1.80; p = 0.86). Response rates and remission rates were also similar. Overall religiosity interacted with treatment group (B = -0.10; SE, 0.05; p = 0.048), suggesting that RCBT was slightly more efficacious in the more religious participants. These preliminary findings suggest that CCBT and RCBT are equivalent treatments of major depression in persons with chronic medical illness. Efficacy, as well as adherence, may be affected by client religiosity.
    The Journal of nervous and mental disease 04/2015; 203(4):243-51. DOI:10.1097/NMD.0000000000000273 · 1.81 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "depression in medical patients, often done by addressing the maladaptive beliefs and thoughts related to medical illness that initiate and maintain depression [13] [14] [15] [16]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper (1) reviews the physical and religious barriers to CBT that disabled medically ill-depressed patients face, (2) discusses research on the relationship between religion and depression-induced physiological changes, (3) describes an ongoing randomized clinical trial of religious versus secular CBT in chronically ill patients with mild-to-moderate major depression designed to (a) overcome physical and religious barriers to CBT and (b) compare the efficacy of religious versus secular CBT in relieving depression and improving immune and endocrine functions, and (4) presents preliminary results that illustrate the technical difficulties that have been encountered in implementing this trial. CBT is being delivered remotely via instant messaging, telephone, or Skype, and Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, and Hindu versions of religious CBT are being developed. The preliminary results described here are particular to the technologies employed in this study and are not results from the CBT clinical trial whose findings will be published in the future after the study ends and data are analyzed. The ultimate goal is to determine if a psychotherapy delivered remotely that integrates patients' religious resources improves depression more quickly than a therapy that ignores them, and whether religious CBT is more effective than conventional CBT in reversing depression-induced physiological changes.
    Depression research and treatment 06/2012; 2012:460419. DOI:10.1155/2012/460419
  • Source
    • "Researchers have assessed the clinical and cost effectiveness of various treatments for depressed patients (Bower et al., 2000, Ward et al., 2000). The effectiveness of general practitioner care with both cognitive-behaviour therapy (CBT) and non-directive counselling were all compared. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Money is the default way in which intangible losses, such as pain and suffering, are currently valued and compensated in law courts. Economists have suggested that subjective well-being regressions can be used to guide compensation payouts for psychological distress following traumatic life events. We bring together studies from law, economic, psychology and medical journals to show that alleviating psychological distress through psychological therapy could be at least 32 times more cost effective than financial compensation. This result is not only important for law courts but has important implications for public health. Mental health is deteriorating across the world - improvements to mental health care might be a more efficient way to increase the health and happiness of our nations than pure income growth.
    Health Economics Policy and Law 11/2009; 5(4):509-16. DOI:10.1017/S1744133109990326 · 1.33 Impact Factor
Show more