Browse by author
Lookup NU author(s): Professor Paula Whitty
Full text for this publication is not currently held within this repository. Alternative links are provided below where available.
Background: A number of enhancement strategies have been proposed to improve the quality and outcome of care for depression in primary care settings. Decision-makers are likely to need to know whether these interventions are cost-effective in routine primary care settings. Method: We conducted a systematic review of all full economicevaluations (cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses) accompanying randomised controlled trials of enhanced primary care for depression. Costs were standardised to UK pounds/US dollars and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were visually summarised using a permutation matrix. Results: We identified 11 full economic evaluations (4757 patients). A near-uniform finding was that the interventions based upon collaborative care/case management resulted in improved outcomes but were also associated with greater costs. When considering primary care depression treatment costs alone, ICER estimates ranged from £7 ($13, no confidence interval given) to £13 ($24, 95% CI-105 to 148) per additional depression-free day. Educational interventions alone were associated with increased cost and no clinical benefit. Conclusions: Improved outcomes through depression management programmes using a collaborative care/case management approach can be expected, but are associated with increased cost and will require investment. Declaration of interest: None.
Author(s): Gilbody S, Bower P, Whitty P
Publication type: Review
Publication status: Published
Journal: British Journal of Psychiatry
Year: 2006
Volume: 189
Issue: 4
Pages: 297-308
ISSN (print): 0007-1250
ISSN (electronic): 1472-1465
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.105.016006
DOI: 10.1192/bjp.bp.105.016006
