Eva Ørnbøl

Long-term economic evaluation of cognitive-behavioural group treatment versus enhanced usual care for functional somatic syndromes

Research output: Contribution to journal/Conference contribution in journal/Contribution to newspaperJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

Long-term economic evaluation of cognitive-behavioural group treatment versus enhanced usual care for functional somatic syndromes. / Schröder, Andreas; Ørnbøl, Eva; Jensen, Jens Søndergaard; Sharpe, Michael; Fink, Per.

In: Journal of Psychosomatic Research, Vol. 94, 03.2017, p. 73-81.

Research output: Contribution to journal/Conference contribution in journal/Contribution to newspaperJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

APA

CBE

MLA

Vancouver

Author

Bibtex

@article{3e9f436fea4d46fb87c2119d15ede6bf,
title = "Long-term economic evaluation of cognitive-behavioural group treatment versus enhanced usual care for functional somatic syndromes",
abstract = "OBJECTIVE: Patients with functional somatic syndromes (FSS) such as fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue syndrome have a poor outcome and can incur high healthcare and societal costs. We aimed to compare the medium-term (16months) cost-effectiveness and the long-term (40months) economic outcomes of a bespoke cognitive-behavioural group treatment (STreSS) with that of enhanced usual care (EUC).METHODS: We obtained complete data on healthcare and indirect costs (i.e. labour marked-related and health-related benefits) from public registries for 120 participants from a randomised controlled trial. Costs were calculated as per capita public expenses in 2010 €. QALYs gained were estimated from the SF-6D. We conducted a medium-term cost-effectiveness analysis and a long-term cost-minimization analysis from both a healthcare (i.e. direct cost) and a societal (i.e. total cost) perspective.RESULTS: In the medium term, the probability that STreSS was cost-effective at thresholds of 25,000 to 35,000 € per QALY was 93-95% from a healthcare perspective, but only 50-55% from a societal perspective. In the long term, however, STreSS was associated with increasing savings in indirect costs, mainly due to a greater number of patients self-supporting. When combined with stable long-term reductions in healthcare expenditures, there were total cost savings of 7184 € (95% CI 2271 to 12,096, p=0.004) during the third year after treatment.CONCLUSION: STreSS treatment costs an average of 1545 €. This cost was more than offset by subsequent savings in direct and indirect costs. Implementation could both improve patient outcomes and reduce costs.",
keywords = "Journal Article",
author = "Andreas Schr{\"o}der and Eva {\O}rnb{\o}l and Jensen, {Jens S{\o}ndergaard} and Michael Sharpe and Per Fink",
note = "Copyright {\textcopyright} 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.",
year = "2017",
month = mar,
doi = "10.1016/j.jpsychores.2017.01.005",
language = "English",
volume = "94",
pages = "73--81",
journal = "Journal of Psychosomatic Research",
issn = "0022-3999",
publisher = "Elsevier",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Long-term economic evaluation of cognitive-behavioural group treatment versus enhanced usual care for functional somatic syndromes

AU - Schröder, Andreas

AU - Ørnbøl, Eva

AU - Jensen, Jens Søndergaard

AU - Sharpe, Michael

AU - Fink, Per

N1 - Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

PY - 2017/3

Y1 - 2017/3

N2 - OBJECTIVE: Patients with functional somatic syndromes (FSS) such as fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue syndrome have a poor outcome and can incur high healthcare and societal costs. We aimed to compare the medium-term (16months) cost-effectiveness and the long-term (40months) economic outcomes of a bespoke cognitive-behavioural group treatment (STreSS) with that of enhanced usual care (EUC).METHODS: We obtained complete data on healthcare and indirect costs (i.e. labour marked-related and health-related benefits) from public registries for 120 participants from a randomised controlled trial. Costs were calculated as per capita public expenses in 2010 €. QALYs gained were estimated from the SF-6D. We conducted a medium-term cost-effectiveness analysis and a long-term cost-minimization analysis from both a healthcare (i.e. direct cost) and a societal (i.e. total cost) perspective.RESULTS: In the medium term, the probability that STreSS was cost-effective at thresholds of 25,000 to 35,000 € per QALY was 93-95% from a healthcare perspective, but only 50-55% from a societal perspective. In the long term, however, STreSS was associated with increasing savings in indirect costs, mainly due to a greater number of patients self-supporting. When combined with stable long-term reductions in healthcare expenditures, there were total cost savings of 7184 € (95% CI 2271 to 12,096, p=0.004) during the third year after treatment.CONCLUSION: STreSS treatment costs an average of 1545 €. This cost was more than offset by subsequent savings in direct and indirect costs. Implementation could both improve patient outcomes and reduce costs.

AB - OBJECTIVE: Patients with functional somatic syndromes (FSS) such as fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue syndrome have a poor outcome and can incur high healthcare and societal costs. We aimed to compare the medium-term (16months) cost-effectiveness and the long-term (40months) economic outcomes of a bespoke cognitive-behavioural group treatment (STreSS) with that of enhanced usual care (EUC).METHODS: We obtained complete data on healthcare and indirect costs (i.e. labour marked-related and health-related benefits) from public registries for 120 participants from a randomised controlled trial. Costs were calculated as per capita public expenses in 2010 €. QALYs gained were estimated from the SF-6D. We conducted a medium-term cost-effectiveness analysis and a long-term cost-minimization analysis from both a healthcare (i.e. direct cost) and a societal (i.e. total cost) perspective.RESULTS: In the medium term, the probability that STreSS was cost-effective at thresholds of 25,000 to 35,000 € per QALY was 93-95% from a healthcare perspective, but only 50-55% from a societal perspective. In the long term, however, STreSS was associated with increasing savings in indirect costs, mainly due to a greater number of patients self-supporting. When combined with stable long-term reductions in healthcare expenditures, there were total cost savings of 7184 € (95% CI 2271 to 12,096, p=0.004) during the third year after treatment.CONCLUSION: STreSS treatment costs an average of 1545 €. This cost was more than offset by subsequent savings in direct and indirect costs. Implementation could both improve patient outcomes and reduce costs.

KW - Journal Article

U2 - 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2017.01.005

DO - 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2017.01.005

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 28183406

VL - 94

SP - 73

EP - 81

JO - Journal of Psychosomatic Research

JF - Journal of Psychosomatic Research

SN - 0022-3999

ER -