Economic evaluation of psychosocial interventions in cancer: A systematic review — ASN Events

Economic evaluation of psychosocial interventions in cancer: A systematic review (#103)

Mbathio Dieng 1 , Anne E Cust 1 , Nadine A Kasparian 2 , Graham J Mann 3 , Rachael L Morton 4
  1. Cancer Epidemiology and Services Research , University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
  2. School of Women's and Children's Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
  3. University of Sydney at Westmead Millennium Institute and Melanoma Institute, Westmead Institute for Cancer Research, Sydney, NSW, Australia
  4. University of Sydney, NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, Camperdown, NSW, Australia

Aims: Although the effectiveness of many psychosocial interventions for people with cancer has been established, one barrier to implementation in routine clinical care is a lack of data on cost-effectiveness. We conducted a systematic review of published literature to assess the cost-effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for improving psychological adjustment among people with any type of cancer.

Methods: Systematic review, study quality appraisal,and narrative synthesis.

Results: Eight studies involving 1,668 patients were identified. Four of these reported outcomes in a cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) framework. Six studies reported psychosocial interventions to be cost-effective for improving health-related quality of life, mood, pain, distress, or fear of cancer progression, compared to usual care. Of these six studies, three were cognitive behavioural therapy based interventions, one was a nurse-delivered telephone follow-up plus educational group program, one was a group-based exercise and psychosocial intervention, and one was a series of 10 face-to-face or telephone-based individual support sessions delivered by a nurse. The quality of studies according to the CHEC-list criteria was good overall; however, some studies were limited by their choice of outcome measure and omission of important categories of costs.

Conclusions: Several psychosocial interventions, particularly those based on cognitive behavioural therapy, have been demonstrated to represent good value for money in cancer care. The quality of studies can be improved with a clear definition of the economic question, inclusion of all relevant costs, and consideration of utility-based quality of life measures for QALY estimation. Further research is needed to assess the cost-effectiveness of psycho-educational interventions.

Systematic review registration: PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42014006370.

#COSA2015