We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Algorithm-guided treatment of depression reduces treatment costs--results from the randomized controlled German Algorithm Project (GAPII).
Journal of Affective Disorders 2011 November
BACKGROUND: The German Algorithm Project, Phase 2 (GAP2) revealed that a standardized stepwise treatment regimen (SSTR) results in better treatment outcomes than treatment as usual (TAU) in depressed inpatients. The objective of this study was a health economic evaluation of SSTR based on a cost effectiveness analysis (CEA).
METHODS: GAP2 was a randomized controlled study with 148 patients. In an intention to treat (ITT) analysis direct treatment costs for study duration (SD) and total time in hospital (TTH; enrolment to discharge) were calculated based on daily hospital charges followed by a CEA to calculate cost expenditure per remitted patient.
RESULTS: Treatment costs in SSTR compared to TAU were significantly lower for SD (SSTR: 10 830 € ± 8 632 €, TAU: 15 202 € ± 12 483 €; p = 0.026) and did not differ significantly for TTH (SSTR: 21 561 € ± 16 162 €; TAU: 18 248 € ± 13 454; p = 0.208). CEA revealed that the costs per remission in SSTR were significantly lower for SD (SSTR: 20 035 € ± 15 970 €; SSTR: 38 793 € ± 31 853 €; p<0.0001) and TTH (SSTR: 31 285 € ± 23 451 €; TAU: 38 581 € ± 28 449 €, p = 0.041).
LIMITATIONS: Indirect costs were not assessed. Different dropout rates in TAU and SSTR complicated interpretation of data.
CONCLUSION: An SSTR-based algorithm results in a superior cost effectiveness at no significant extra costs. Implementation of treatment algorithms in inpatient-care may help reduce treatment costs.
METHODS: GAP2 was a randomized controlled study with 148 patients. In an intention to treat (ITT) analysis direct treatment costs for study duration (SD) and total time in hospital (TTH; enrolment to discharge) were calculated based on daily hospital charges followed by a CEA to calculate cost expenditure per remitted patient.
RESULTS: Treatment costs in SSTR compared to TAU were significantly lower for SD (SSTR: 10 830 € ± 8 632 €, TAU: 15 202 € ± 12 483 €; p = 0.026) and did not differ significantly for TTH (SSTR: 21 561 € ± 16 162 €; TAU: 18 248 € ± 13 454; p = 0.208). CEA revealed that the costs per remission in SSTR were significantly lower for SD (SSTR: 20 035 € ± 15 970 €; SSTR: 38 793 € ± 31 853 €; p<0.0001) and TTH (SSTR: 31 285 € ± 23 451 €; TAU: 38 581 € ± 28 449 €, p = 0.041).
LIMITATIONS: Indirect costs were not assessed. Different dropout rates in TAU and SSTR complicated interpretation of data.
CONCLUSION: An SSTR-based algorithm results in a superior cost effectiveness at no significant extra costs. Implementation of treatment algorithms in inpatient-care may help reduce treatment costs.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app