Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
STUDY OBJECTIVES: Clinical guidelines recommend cognitive-behavioral therapy for insomnia (CBT-I) as first-line treatment. However, provision of CBT-I is limited due to insufficient time and expertise. Internet-delivered CBT-I might bridge this gap. This study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of guided, internet-delivered CBT-I (i-Sleep) compared to care-as-usual for insomnia patients in general practice over 26 weeks from a societal perspective. METHODS: Primary outcomes were the Insomnia Severity Index (ISI, continuous score and clinically relevant response), and Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). Societal costs were assessed at baseline, and at 8 and 26 weeks. Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation. Statistical uncertainty around cost and effect differences was estimated using bootstrapping, and presented in cost-effectiveness planes and acceptability curves. RESULTS: The difference in societal costs between i-Sleep and care-as-usual was not statistically significant (-€318; 95% CI -1282 to 645). Cost-effectiveness analyses revealed a 95% probability of i-Sleep being cost-effective compared to care-as-usual at ceiling ratios of €450/extra point of improvement in ISI score and €7,000/additional response to treatment, respectively. Cost-utility analysis showed a 67% probability of cost-effectiveness for i-Sleep compared to care-as-usual at a ceiling ratio of 20,000 €/QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: The internet-delivered intervention may be considered cost-effective for insomnia severity in comparison with care-as-usual from the societal perspective. However, the improvement in insomnia severity symptoms did not result in similar improvements in QALYs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Baka et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: