Verlagslink DOI: 10.1186/s12888-025-07428-5
Titel: Cost-utility analysis of a collaborative and stepped care model in patients with mental disorders in German primary care (the COMET study)
Sprache: Englisch
Autorenschaft: Grochtdreis, Thomas 
Heddaeus, Daniela 
Seeralan, Tharanya 
Maehder, Kerstin 
Porzelt, Sarah 
Daubmann, Anne 
Pepić, Amra 
Löwe, Bernd 
Rosenkranz, Moritz 
Schäfer, Ingo 
Scherer, Martin 
Schulte, Bernd 
von dem Knesebeck, Olaf 
Weigel, Angelika 
Wegscheider, Karl 
Werner, Silke 
Zapf, Antonia 
Zimmermann, Thomas 
Dirmaier, Jörg 
Härter, Martin 
König, Hans Helmut 
Dams, Judith 
Schlagwörter: Alcohol-related disorders; Anxiety disorders; Collaborative care; Cost-effectiveness analysis; Depressive disorders; Primary care; Somatoform disorders; Stepped care
Erscheinungsdatum: 13-Okt-2025
Verlag: BioMed Central
Zeitschrift oder Schriftenreihe: BMC psychiatry 
Zeitschriftenband: 25
Zeitschriftenausgabe: 1
Zusammenfassung: 
Background: In order to reduce the health burden and the health care costs caused by the most common mental disorders, health care systems throughout Europe have tried to improve services and treatment choices. Recently, a collaborative and stepped care (CSC) model for patients with depressive, anxiety, somatoform or alcohol-related disorders and their comorbidities was developed and implemented under routine care conditions in Germany. The aim of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of this CSC model from a societal perspective with a 12-month follow-up. Methods: This study was part of a cluster-randomized controlled trial to compare a CSC model with treatment as usual (TAU) in patients with depressive, anxiety, somatoform or alcohol-related disorders and their comorbidities in German routine care. The cost-effectiveness of the CSC model compared with TAU was analyzed based on the incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) with quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) based on the EQ-5D-5L index as measure of health effect. The uncertainty of the ICUR was assessed using cost-effectiveness acceptability curves based on net-benefit regressions. Results: In total, n = 307 patients in the CSC and n = 308 patients in the TAU group were included, with a mean age of 38 and 43 years, respectively. There were no differences in mean QALYs and total costs between the CSC (0.86 QALY, 27,174€) and the TAU group (0.86 QALY, 26,441€). Only the adjusted mean costs for outpatient mental health services were higher in the CSC group (+685€; 95% CI 398€ to 972€; p < 0.001). The probability of cost-effectiveness of the CSC model was 35% at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) of 0€ and 34% at a WTP of 50,000€ per additional QALY. Conclusion: The evaluated CSC model was unlikely to be cost-effective compared with TAU from a societal perspective for patients with depressive, anxiety, somatoform or alcohol-related disorders and their comorbidities during the 12-month follow-up period. The higher mean costs for outpatient mental health services might indicate that general practitioners in the CSC group were able to refer patients to psychotherapists and psychiatrists more frequently through the network of health care providers. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03226743. Registration date: 24/7/2017.
URI: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12738/18485
ISSN: 1471-244X
Begutachtungsstatus: Diese Version hat ein Peer-Review-Verfahren durchlaufen (Peer Review)
Einrichtung: Fakultät Soziale Arbeit und Kindheitspädagogik 
Dokumenttyp: Zeitschriftenbeitrag
Enthalten in den Sammlungen:Publications without full text

Zur Langanzeige

Google ScholarTM

Prüfe

HAW Katalog

Prüfe

Volltext ergänzen

Feedback zu diesem Datensatz


Diese Ressource wurde unter folgender Copyright-Bestimmung veröffentlicht: Lizenz von Creative Commons Creative Commons