Cognitive behaviour therapy for improving social recovery in psychosis: cost-effectiveness analysis

Garry R. Barton (Lead / Corresponding author), Jo Hodgekins, Miranda Mugford, Peter B. Jones, Tim Croudace, David Fowler

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    20 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    A randomised trial was conducted in order to estimate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of social recovery orientated cognitive behavioural therapy (SRCBT) for people diagnosed with psychosis, compared to case management alone (CMA). The mean incremental health and social care cost, and the mean incremental quality adjusted life year (QALY) gain, of SRCBT was calculated over the 9 month intervention period. The cost-effectiveness of SCRBT was in turn estimated, and considered in relation to the cost-effectiveness threshold of 20000 UK pounds per QALY. The level of uncertainty associated with that decision was estimated by calculating the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve for SRCBT. N=35 received SRCBT and N=42 received CMA. The mean incremental cost was estimated to be 668 UK pounds, and the mean incremental QALY gain 0.035. SRCBT was estimated to be cost-effective as it had a cost per QALY of 18844 UK pounds, which was more favourable than the assumed cost-effectiveness threshold of 20000 UK pounds per QALY. At that threshold the probability of being cost-effective was however estimated to be 54.3% according to the CEAC, suggesting that further research may be warranted in order to reduce the level of uncertainty associated with the decision as to whether SRCBT is cost-effective.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)158-163
    Number of pages6
    JournalSchizophrenia Research
    Volume112
    Issue number1-3
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - Jul 2009

    Keywords

    • Psychiatry and Mental health
    • Biological Psychiatry

    Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Cognitive behaviour therapy for improving social recovery in psychosis: cost-effectiveness analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this