Cost-effectiveness of acceptance and commitment therapy for people living with motor neuron disease, and their health-related quality of life.

BACKGROUND: Given the degenerative nature of the condition, people living with motor neuron disease (MND) experience high levels of psychological distress. The purpose of this research was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT), adapted for the specific needs of this population, for improving quality of life. METHODS: A trial-based cost-utility analysis over a 9-month period was conducted comparing ACT plus usual care (n = 97) versus usual care alone (n = 94) from the perspective of the National Health Service. In the primary analysis, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were computed using health utilities generated from the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire. Sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses were also carried out. RESULTS: Difference in costs was statistically significant between the two arms, driven mainly by the intervention costs. Effects measured by EQ-5D-5L were not statistically significantly different between the two arms. The incremental cost-effectiveness was above the £20,000 to £30,000 per QALY gained threshold used in the UK. However, the difference in effects was statistically significant when measured by the McGill Quality of Life-Revised (MQOL-R) questionnaire. The intervention was cost-effective in a subgroup experiencing medium deterioration in motor neuron symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the intervention being cost-ineffective in the primary analysis, the significant difference in the effects measured by MQOL-R, the low costs of the intervention, the results in the subgroup analysis, and the fact that ACT was shown to improve the quality of life for people living with MND, suggest that ACT could be incorporated into MND clinical services.

Economic Evaluation of Videoconference Group Acceptance and Commitment Therapy and Behavioral Activation Therapy for Depression Versus Usual Care Among Adults With Chronic Low Back Pain Plus Comorbid Depressive Symptoms.

Chronic pain and depression are frequently comorbid conditions associated with significant health care and social costs. This study examined the cost-utility and cost-effectiveness of videoconference-based group forms of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) and Behavioral Activation Therapy for Depression (BATD), as a complement to treatment-as-usual (TAU), for patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) plus depressive symptoms, compared to TAU alone. A trial-based economic evaluation (n = 234) was conducted from a governmental and health care perspective with a time horizon of 12 months. Primary outcomes were the Brief Pain Inventory-Interference Scale (BPI-IS) and Quality Adjusted Life Year. Compared to TAU, ACT achieved a significant reduction in total costs (d = .47), and BATD achieved significant reductions in indirect (d = .61) and total costs (d = .63). Significant improvements in BPI-IS (d = .73 and d = .66, respectively) and Quality Adjusted Life Year scores (d = .46 and d = .28, respectively) were found in ACT and BATD compared to TAU. No significant differences in costs and outcomes were found between ACT and BATD. In the intention-to-treat analyses, from the governmental and health care perspective, no significant differences in cost reduction and incremental effects were identified in the comparison between ACT, BATD, and TAU. However, in the complete case analysis, significant incremental effects of ACT (∆BPI-IS = -1.57 and -1.39, respectively) and BATD (∆BPI-IS = -1.08 and -1.04, respectively) compared with TAU were observed. In the per-protocol analysis, only the significant incremental effects of ACT (∆BPI-IS = -1.68 and -1.43, respectively) compared to TAU were detected. In conclusion, ACT and BATD might be efficient options in the management of CLBP plus comorbid depression symptoms as compared to usual care. However, no clear difference was found in the comparison between the 2 active therapies regarding cost-effectiveness or cost-utility. PERSPECTIVE: The economic evaluation of psychological therapies for the management of complex conditions can be used in decision-making and resource allocation. This study provides evidence that ACT and BATD are more effective and involve a greater reduction in costs than usual care in the management of CLBP plus comorbid depressive symptoms. TRIAL NUMBER: NCT04140838.

Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of an Acceptance and Commitment Therapy intervention vs. a Cognitive Behavioral Therapy intervention for older adults with anxiety symptoms: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: A previous randomized controlled trial in older adults with anxiety symptoms found no differences between a brief blended Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) intervention and brief face-to-face Cognitive Behavior Therapy (CBT) regarding anxiety symptom severity at posttreatment and 12-month follow-up. A health-economic evaluation comparing these interventions has not yet been conducted. OBJECTIVE: This study examined the one-year cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of blended ACT compared to face-to-face CBT for older adults with anxiety symptoms. METHODS: The economic evaluation was embedded in a randomized controlled trial comparing blended ACT to CBT in 314 older adults with mild to moderately severe anxiety symptoms. Data were collected at baseline and 3, 6 and 12 months post baseline. For the cost-effectiveness analysis, treatment response was defined as a reliable improvement in anxiety symptom severity (measured with the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7) between baseline and 12-month follow-up. To assess cost-utility, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were computed using EuroQol-5 Dimensions-5 Levels-5 utility scores. Analyses took the societal perspective, including both healthcare costs and productivity costs. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated using 2500 bootstraps of seemingly unrelated regression equations of costs and effects. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the findings. RESULTS: Differences between the blended ACT group and CBT group in treatment response and QALYs were statistically insignificant and clinically irrelevant. The ACT intervention was associated with an average per-participant cost reduction of €466 ($593) compared to CBT, which resulted from lower productivity costs in the blended ACT group. From a healthcare perspective, the ACT intervention was associated with higher costs (by €71 ($90)) than CBT. CONCLUSIONS: The results do not indicate that from a health-economic perspective blended ACT should be preferred over CBT in the treatment of older adults with anxiety symptoms. The findings support a model of shared decision making, where clinicians and patients collaboratively decide on the preferred intervention, based on ethical-medical, practical and personal considerations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register: TRIAL NL6131 (NTR6270); https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/6131.

A guided and unguided internet- and mobile-based intervention for chronic pain: health economic evaluation alongside a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims at evaluating the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of a guided and unguided internet-based intervention for chronic pain patients (ACTonPainguided and ACTonPainunguided) compared with a waitlist control group (CG) as well as the comparative cost-effectiveness of the guided and the unguided version. DESIGN: This is a health economic evaluation alongside a three-arm randomised controlled trial from a societal perspective. Assessments were conducted at baseline, 9 weeks and 6 months after randomisation. SETTING: Participants were recruited through online and offline strategies and in collaboration with a health insurance company. PARTICIPANTS: 302 adults (≥18 years, pain for at least 6 months) were randomly allocated to one of the three groups (ACTonPainguided, ACTonPainunguided, CG). INTERVENTIONS: ACTonPain consists of seven modules and is based on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. ACTonPainguided and ACTonPainunguided only differ in provision of human support. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Main outcomes of the cost-effectiveness and the cost-utility analyses were meaningful change in pain interference (treatment response) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), respectively. Economic evaluation estimates were the incremental cost-effectiveness and cost-utility ratio (ICER/ICUR). RESULTS: At 6-month follow-up, treatment response and QALYs were highest in ACTonPainguided (44% and 0.280; mean costs = €6,945), followed by ACTonPainunguided (28% and 0.266; mean costs = €6,560) and the CG (16% and 0.244; mean costs = €6,908). ACTonPainguided vs CG revealed an ICER of €45 and an ICUR of €604.ACTonPainunguided dominated CG. At a willingness-to-pay of €0 the probability of being cost-effective was 50% for ACTonPainguided (vs CG, for both treatment response and QALY gained) and 67% for ACTonPainunguided (vs CG, for both treatment response and QALY gained). These probabilities rose to 95% when society's willingness-to-pay is €91,000 (ACTonPainguided) and €127,000 (ACTonPainunguided) per QALY gained. ACTonPainguided vs ACTonPainunguided revealed an ICER of €2,374 and an ICUR of €45,993. CONCLUSIONS: Depending on society's willingness-to-pay, ACTonPain is a potentially cost-effective adjunct to established pain treatment. ACTonPainunguided (vs CG) revealed lower costs at better health outcomes. However, uncertainty has to be considered. Direct comparison of the two interventions does not indicate a preference for ACTonPainguided. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS00006183.

An Internet-based Acceptance and Commitment Therapy intervention for older adults with anxiety complaints: study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Anxiety is among the most prevalent and disabling mental health problems in older adults. Few older adults with mild to moderately severe anxiety symptoms receive adequate interventions, putting them at risk for developing anxiety disorders, depression, and various somatic problems. Effective, low-threshold interventions should be developed. Blended care, in which a web-based intervention is combined with a limited amount of face-to-face contacts with a mental healthcare counselor at the general practice, is a promising option. The online self-help intervention "Living to the Full"-an Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) intervention-has been proven to reduce depression and anxiety in several patient groups, but has not yet been investigated in older adults. The aim of this study is to evaluate the (cost-)effectiveness of a blended form of "Living to the Full" in reducing anxiety symptoms in adults aged 55 to 75 years. Furthermore, moderators and mediators of the treatment effect are investigated. METHODS/DESIGN: The (cost-)effectiveness of the ACT intervention will be investigated in a cluster single-blind randomized controlled trial (RCT). The blended intervention will be compared to treatment-as-usual. Thirty-six mental health counselors working at general practices in the Netherlands will be randomized to deliver blended care or treatment as usual. A total of 240 participants (aged 55-75 years) with mild to moderately severe anxiety complaints (defined as a total score of 5-15 on the GAD-7) will be recruited. There are four measurements consisting of online questionnaires (primary outcome: GAD-7) and a telephone interview: before the start of the intervention; directly following the intervention (14 weeks after baseline); and six and twelve months after baseline. Possible mediator variables will be assessed multiple times basis during the intervention. DISCUSSION: This RCT will evaluate the effectiveness of a blended ACT intervention for older adults with anxiety symptoms. If the intervention is shown to be effective, it will be implemented, thereby improving the accessibility and quality of preventive interventions for older adults with anxiety problems. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register, NTR6270 . Registered on 21 March 2017.

Cost-Effectiveness of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy and a Workplace Intervention for Employees on Sickness Absence due to Mental Disorders.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate cost-effectiveness of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) and workplace dialogue intervention (WDI), both as stand-alone interventions and in combination, compared with treatment as usual (TAU), for employees on sickness absence with mental disorders. METHODS: Employees (n = 352, 78.4% females) on sickness absence were randomized to one of four groups. Cost-utility analyses were conducted from a health care perspective and a limited societal perspective. RESULTS: All groups reported significant improvements in health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) and there were no significant differences in HRQoL or costs between groups. The probability of cost-effectiveness for ACT+WDI was 50% compared with ACT, indicating that both treatment alternatives could be considered equally favorable for decision-makers. TAU and WDI were rejected due to less economic efficiency. CONCLUSION: Adding WDI to ACT cannot be recommended on the basis of our study results.

Cost-Utility of Group Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for Fibromyalgia Versus Recommended Drugs: An Economic Analysis Alongside a 6-Month Randomized Controlled Trial Conducted in Spain (EFFIGACT Study).

The aim of this study was to analyze the cost utility of a group-based form of acceptance and commitment therapy (GACT) in patients with fibromyalgia (FM) compared with patients receiving recommended pharmacological treatment (RPT) or on a waiting list (WL). The data were derived from a previously published study, a randomized controlled trial that focused on clinical outcomes. Health economic outcomes included health-related quality of life and health care use at baseline and at 6-month follow-up using the EuroQoL and the Client Service Receipt Inventory, respectively. Analyses included quality-adjusted life years, direct and indirect cost differences, and incremental cost effectiveness ratios. A total of 156 FM patients were randomized (51 GACT, 52 RPT, 53 WL). GACT was related to significantly less direct costs over the 6-month study period compared with both control arms (GACT €824.2 ± 1,062.7 vs RPT €1,730.7 ± 1,656.8 vs WL €2,462.7 ± 2,822.0). Lower direct costs for GACT compared with RPT were due to lower costs from primary care visits and FM-related medications. The incremental cost effectiveness ratios were dominant in the completers' analysis and remained robust in the sensitivity analyses. In conclusion, acceptance and commitment therapy appears to be a cost-effective treatment compared with RPT in patients with FM. PERSPECTIVE: Decision-makers have to prioritize their budget on the treatment option that is the most cost effective for the management of a specific patient group. From government as well as health care perspectives, this study shows that a GACT is more cost effective than pharmacological treatment in management of FM.

A prospective service evaluation of acceptance and commitment therapy for patients with refractory epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: The aims of this service evaluation were to explore the effectiveness of a psychotherapeutic treatment for patients with epilepsy based on the acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) approach and to assess whether this treatment is likely to be cost-effective. METHOD: We conducted an uncontrolled prospective study of consecutive patients with refractory epilepsy referred for outpatient psychological treatment to a single psychotherapist because of emotional difficulties related to their seizure disorder. Participants were referred by consultant neurologists, neuropsychologists, or epilepsy nurses, completed a set of validated self-report questionnaires (Short Form - 12 version 2, Generalized Anxiety Disorder - 7, Neurological Disorders Depression Inventory for Epilepsy, Work and Social Adjustment Scale, and Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale), and reported their seizure frequency at referral, the end of therapy, and six months posttherapy. Patients received a maximum of 20 sessions of one-to-one psychological treatment supported by a workbook. Cost-effectiveness was estimated based on the calculation of quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gains associated with the intervention. RESULTS: Sixty patients completed the prepsychotherapy and postpsychotherapy questionnaires, among whom 41 also provided six-month follow-up data. Patients received six to 20 sessions of psychotherapy (mean=11.5, S.D.=9.6). Psychotherapy was associated with significant medium to large positive effects on depression, anxiety, quality of life, self-esteem, and work and social adjustment (ps<.001), which were sustained six months after therapy. The mean cost of the psychotherapy was £445.6, and, assuming that benefits were maintained for at least six months after the end of therapy, the cost per QALY was estimated to be £11,140 (€14,119, $18,016; the cost per QALY would be half this amount if the benefits lasted one year). CONCLUSION: The findings of this pilot study indicate that the described psychotherapeutic intervention may be a cost-effective treatment for patients with epilepsy. The results suggest that a randomized controlled trial of the psychotherapy program is justified.

Efficacy and Cost-effectiveness of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy and Applied Relaxation for Longstanding Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To date, few studies have compared Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) for longstanding pain with established treatments. Only 1 study has evaluated the cost-effectiveness of ACT. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of ACT and applied relaxation (AR) for adults with unspecific, longstanding pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: On the basis of the inclusion criteria 60 consecutive patients received 12 weekly group sessions of ACT or AR. Data were collected pretreatment, midtreatment, and posttreatment, as well as at 3- and 6-month follow-up. Growth curve modeling was used to analyze treatment effects on pain disability, pain intensity, health-related quality of life (physical domain), anxiety, depression, and acceptance. RESULTS: Significant improvements were seen across conditions (pretreatment to follow-up assessment) on all outcome measures. Pain disability decreased significantly in ACT relative to AR from preassessment to postassessment. A corresponding decrease in pain disability was seen in AR between postassessment and 6-month follow-up. Pain acceptance increased only in ACT, and this effect was maintained at 6-month follow-up. Approximately 20% of the participants achieved clinically significant change after treatment. Health economic analyses showed that ACT was more cost-effective than AR at post and 3-month follow-up assessment, but not at 6-month follow-up. DISCUSSION: More studies investigating moderators and mediators of change are needed. The present study is one of few that have evaluated the cost-effectiveness of ACT and AR and compared ACT with an established behavioral intervention, and the results provide additional support for behavioral interventions for longstanding pain.

Comparing the clinical-effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an internet-delivered Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) intervention with a waiting list control among adults with chronic pain: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Internet-delivered psychological interventions among people with chronic pain have the potential to overcome environmental and economic barriers to the provision of evidence-based psychological treatment in the Irish health service context. While the use of internet-delivered cognitive-behavioural therapy programmes has been consistently shown to have small-to-moderate effects in the management of chronic pain, there is a paucity in the research regarding the effectiveness of an internet-delivered Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) programme among people with chronic pain. The current study will compare the clinical-effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of an online ACT intervention with a waitlist control condition in terms of the management of pain-related functional interference among people with chronic pain. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Participants with non-malignant pain that persists for at least 3 months will be randomised to one of two study conditions. The experimental group will undergo an eight-session internet-delivered ACT programme over an 8-week period. The control group will be a waiting list group and will be offered the ACT intervention after the 3-month follow-up period. Participants will be assessed preintervention, postintervention and at a 3-month follow-up. The primary outcome will be pain-related functional interference. Secondary outcomes will include: pain intensity, depression, global impression of change, acceptance of chronic pain and quality of life. A qualitative evaluation of the perspectives of the participants regarding the ACT intervention will be completed after the trial. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study will be performed in agreement with the Declaration of Helsinki and is approved by the National University of Ireland Galway Research Ethics Committee (12/05/05). The results of the trial will be published according to the CONSORT statement and will be presented at conferences and reported in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN18166896.

A feasibility study of brief group-based acceptance and commitment therapy for chronic pain in general practice: recruitment, attendance, and patient views.

BACKGROUND: Acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT), a form of cognitive-behavioral therapy, may help meet a need for accessible and cost-effective treatments for chronic pain. ACT has a growing evidence base, but has not yet been tested within general practice settings. AIM: The purpose of the present study was to examine the feasibility of conducting a full-scale randomized controlled trial of ACT in general practice. METHODS: A total of 481 potential participants with chronic pain identified from general practice in southwest England were invited into a treatment trial. Subsequently, 102 (21.2%) of those invited were screened, and 73 (71.6%) of those screened were allocated to ACT plus usual care or usual care alone. The ACT treatment included four, four-hour group-based sessions over two weeks. RESULTS: Twenty-six (70.3%) of the patients allocated to ACT attended three or four sessions. Those who received ACT rated it as credible in a short survey, with Mdn rating 7.0 on a 0-10 scale, across five credibility items. During a post-treatment interview considering 12 aspects of the study from invitation to treatment termination, a median of 79.2% of participants rated the aspects 'acceptable.' Qualitative data from the interviews showed a mixed picture of patient experiences, revealing possible tensions between patients' wishes to avoid discomfort and confusion, and treatment methods that explicitly ask patients to, in essence, 'live with' some discomfort and confusion. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that further study of ACT, as a treatment for chronic pain, is feasible in general practice and it may be possible to further optimize the treatment experience.