[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/87626.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Economic impact of third-wave cognitive behavioral therapies: a systematic review and quality assessment of economic evaluations in randomized controlled trials

Author

Listed:
  • Feliu-Soler, Albert
  • Cebolla, Ausias
  • McCracken, Lance M.
  • D'Amico, Francesco
  • Knapp, Martin
  • López-Montoyo, Alba
  • García-Campayo, Javier
  • Soler, Joaquim
  • Baños, Rosa M.
  • Pérez-Aranda, Adrián
  • Andrés-Rodriguez, Laura
  • Rubio-Valera, Maria
  • Luciano, Juan V.
Abstract
The term third-wave cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) encompasses new forms of CBT that both extend and innovate within CBT. Most third-wave therapies have been subject to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) focused on clinical effectiveness; however, the number and quality of economic evaluations in these RCTs has been unknown and may be few. Evidence about efficiency of these therapies may help support decisions on efficient allocation of resources in health policies. The main aim of this study was to systematically review the economic impact of third-wave therapies in the treatment of patients with physical or mental conditions. We conducted a systematic literature search in PubMed, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and CINALH to identify economic evaluations of third-wave therapies. Quality and Risk of Bias (RoB) assessment of economic evaluations was also made using the Drummond 35-item checklist and the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias, respectively. Eleven RCTs were included in this systematic review. Mindfulness-Based Cognitive Therapy (MBCT), Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR), Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT), and extended Behaviour Activation (eBA) showed acceptable cost-effectiveness and cost-utility ratios. No study employed a time horizon of more than 3 years. Quality and RoB assessments highlight some limitations that temper the findings. There is some evidence that MBCT, MBSR, ACT, DBT, and eBA are efficient from a societal or a third-party payer perspective. No economic analysis was found for many third-wave therapies. Therefore, more economic evaluations with high methodological quality are needed.

Suggested Citation

  • Feliu-Soler, Albert & Cebolla, Ausias & McCracken, Lance M. & D'Amico, Francesco & Knapp, Martin & López-Montoyo, Alba & García-Campayo, Javier & Soler, Joaquim & Baños, Rosa M. & Pérez-Aranda, Adrián, 2018. "Economic impact of third-wave cognitive behavioral therapies: a systematic review and quality assessment of economic evaluations in randomized controlled trials," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 87626, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:87626
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/87626/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Elisa Mancinelli & Giulia Bassi & Silvia Gabrielli & Silvia Salcuni, 2022. "The Efficacy of Digital Cognitive–Behavioral Interventions in Supporting the Psychological Adjustment and Sleep Quality of Pregnant Women with Sub-Clinical Symptoms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-18, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    third-wave cognitive behavioral therapies; mindfulness; acceptance; economic evaluation; systematic review;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • J1 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:87626. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.