Cost-effectiveness of Community-Based Depression Interventions for Rural and Urban Adults With Type 2 Diabetes: Projections From Program ACTIVE (Adults Coming Together to Increase Vital Exercise) II

We estimated the cost-effectiveness of the Program ACTIVE (Adults Coming Together to Increase Vital Exercise) II community-based exercise (EXER), cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), and EXER+CBT interventions in adults with type 2 diabetes and depression relative to usual care (UC) and each other. D...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Diabetes care 2021-04, Vol.44 (4), p.874-882
Hauptverfasser: Kuo, Shihchen, Ye, Wen, de Groot, Mary, Saha, Chandan, Shubrook, Jay H, Hornsby, Jr, W Guyton, Pillay, Yegan, Mather, Kieren J, Herman, William H
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:We estimated the cost-effectiveness of the Program ACTIVE (Adults Coming Together to Increase Vital Exercise) II community-based exercise (EXER), cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), and EXER+CBT interventions in adults with type 2 diabetes and depression relative to usual care (UC) and each other. Data were integrated into the Michigan Model for Diabetes to estimate cost and health outcomes over a 10-year simulation time horizon from the health care sector and societal perspectives, discounting costs and benefits at 3% annually. Primary outcome was cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. From the health care sector perspective, the EXER intervention strategy saved $313 (USD) per patient and produced 0.38 more QALY (cost saving), the CBT intervention strategy cost $596 more and gained 0.29 more QALY ($2,058/QALY), and the EXER+CBT intervention strategy cost $403 more and gained 0.69 more QALY ($585/QALY) compared with UC. Both EXER and EXER+CBT interventions dominated the CBT intervention. Compared with EXER, the EXER+CBT intervention strategy cost $716 more and gained 0.31 more QALY ($2,323/QALY). From the societal perspective, compared with UC, the EXER intervention strategy saved $126 (cost saving), the CBT intervention strategy cost $2,838/QALY, and the EXER+CBT intervention strategy cost $1,167/QALY. Both EXER and EXER+CBT interventions still dominated the CBT intervention. In comparison with EXER, the EXER+CBT intervention strategy cost $3,021/QALY. Results were robust in sensitivity analyses. All three Program ACTIVE II interventions represented a good value for money compared with UC. The EXER+CBT intervention was highly cost-effective or cost saving compared with the CBT or EXER interventions.
ISSN:0149-5992
1935-5548
DOI:10.2337/dc20-1639