Premium
Cost‐utility analysis of meaning‐centered group psychotherapy for cancer survivors
Author(s) -
Spek Nadia,
Jansen Femke,
Holtmaat Karen,
Vos Joël,
Breitbart William,
UdenKraan Cornelia F.,
Tollenaar Rob A.E.M.,
Cuijpers Pim,
Coupé Veerle M.H.,
Verdonckde Leeuw Irma M.
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
psycho‐oncology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.41
H-Index - 137
eISSN - 1099-1611
pISSN - 1057-9249
DOI - 10.1002/pon.4726
Subject(s) - randomized controlled trial , quality of life (healthcare) , meaning (existential) , quality adjusted life year , cost–utility analysis , distress , medicine , mental health , cost effectiveness , psychology , psychotherapist , clinical psychology , psychiatry , risk analysis (engineering)
Background Meaning‐centered group psychotherapy for cancer survivors (MCGP‐CS) improves meaning, psychological well‐being, and mental adjustment to cancer and reduces psychological distress. This randomized controlled trial was conducted to investigate the cost‐utility of MCGP‐CS compared with supportive group psychotherapy (SGP) and care‐as‐usual (CAU). Methods In total, 170 patients were randomized to MCGP‐CS, SGP, or CAU. Intervention costs, direct medical and nonmedical costs, productivity losses, and health‐related quality of life were measured until 6 months follow‐up, using the TIC‐P, PRODISQ, data from the hospital information system, and the EQ‐5D. The cost‐utility was calculated by comparing mean cumulative costs and quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs). Results Mean total costs ranged from €4492 (MCGP‐CS) to €5304 (CAU). Mean QALYs ranged .507 (CAU) to .540 (MCGP‐CS). MCGP‐CS had a probability of 74% to be both less costly and more effective than CAU, and 49% compared with SGP. Sensitivity analyses showed these findings are robust. If society is willing to pay €0 for one gained QALY, MCGP‐CS has a 78% probability of being cost‐effective compared with CAU. This increases to 85% and 92% at willingness‐to‐pay thresholds of €10 000 and €30 000, which are commonly accepted thresholds. Conclusions MCGP‐CS is highly likely a cost‐effective intervention, meaning that there is a positive balance between the costs and gains of MCGP‐CS, in comparison with SGP and CAU.