ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: DIALOG+ is a digital psychosocial intervention aimed at making routine meetings between patients and clinicians therapeutically effective. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of implementing DIALOG+ treatment for patients with psychotic disorders in five low- and middle-income countries in Southeast Europe alongside a cluster randomised trial. METHODS: Resource use and quality of life data were collected alongside the multi-country cluster randomised trial of 468 participants with psychotic disorders. Due to COVID-19 interruptions of the trial's original 12-month intervention period, adjusted costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated at the participant level using a mixed-effects model over the first 6 months only. We estimated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) with uncertainty presented using a cost-effectiveness plane and a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve. Seven sensitivity analyses were conducted to check the robustness of the findings. RESULTS: The average cost of delivering DIALOG+ was 91.11 per participant. DIALOG+ was associated with an incremental health gain of 0.0032 QALYs (95% CI -0.0015, 0.0079), incremental costs of 84.17 (95% CI -8.18, 176.52), and an estimated ICER of 26,347.61. The probability of DIALOG+ being cost-effective against three times the weighted gross domestic product (GDP) per capita for the five participating countries was 18.9%. CONCLUSION: Evidence from the cost-effectiveness analyses in this study suggested that DIALOG+ involved relatively low costs. However, it is not likely to be cost-effective in the five participating countries compared with standard care against a willingness-to-pay threshold of three times the weighted GDP per capita per QALY gained.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Psychotic Disorders , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Developing Countries , Europe , Humans , Psychosocial Intervention , Psychotic Disorders/therapy , Quality of LifeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In Southeast Europe (SEE) standard treatment of patients with psychosis is largely based on pharmacotherapy with psychosocial interventions rarely available. DIALOG+ is a digital psychosocial intervention designed to make routine care therapeutically effective. This trial simultaneously examined effectiveness of DIALOG+ versus standard care on clinical and social outcomes (Aim 1) and explored intervention fidelity (Aim 2). METHODS: A hybrid type II effectiveness-implementation, cluster-randomized trial was conducted in five SEE countries: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo*, Montenegro, North Macedonia, and Serbia. The intervention was offered to patients six times across 12 months instead of routine care. The outcomes were subjective quality of life (primary), clinical symptoms, satisfaction with services, and economic costs. Intervention fidelity was operationalized as adherence to the protocol in terms of frequency, duration, content, and coverage. Data were analyzed using multilevel regression. RESULTS: A total of 81 clinicians and 468 patients with psychosis were randomized to DIALOG+ or standard care. The intervention was delivered with high fidelity. The average number of delivered sessions was 5.5 (SD = 2.3) across 12 months. Patients in the intervention arm had better quality of life (MANSA) at 6 months (p = 0.03). No difference was found for other outcomes at 6 months. Due to disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, 12-month data were not interpretable. CONCLUSIONS: DIALOG+ improved subjective quality of life of individuals with psychosis at 6 months (after four sessions), albeit with small effect size. The intervention has the potential to contribute to holistic care of patients with psychosis.
