Cost-effectiveness of PoNDER health visitor training for mothers at lower risk of depression: findings on prevention of postnatal depression from a cluster-randomised controlled trial.
posted on 2019-02-28, 11:45authored byC Henderson, S Dixon, A Bauer, M Knapp, CJ Morrell, P Slade, SJ Walters, T Brugha
BACKGROUND: There is evidence for the cost-effectiveness of health visitor (HV) training to assess postnatal depression (PND) and deliver psychological approaches to women at risk of depression. Whether this approach is cost-effective for lower-risk women is unknown. There is a need to know the cost of HV-delivered universal provision, and how much it might cost to improve health-related quality of life for postnatal women. A sub-study of a cluster-randomised controlled trial in the former Trent region (England) previously investigated the effectiveness of PoNDER HV training in mothers at lower risk of PND. We conducted a parallel cost-effectiveness analysis at 6-months postnatal for all mothers with lower-risk status attributed to an Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) score <12 at 6-weeks postnatal. METHODS: Intervention HVs were trained in assessment and cognitive behavioural or person-centred psychological support techniques to prevent depression. Outcomes examined: quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gains over the period between 6 weeks and 6 months derived from SF-6D (from SF-36); risk-of-depression at 6 months (dichotomising 6-month EPDS scores into lower risk (<12) and at-risk (⩾12). RESULTS: In lower-risk women, 1474 intervention (63 clusters) and 767 control participants (37 clusters) had valid 6-week and 6-month EPDS scores. Costs and outcomes data were available for 1459 participants. 6-month adjusted costs were £82 lower in intervention than control groups, with 0.002 additional QALY gained. The probability of cost-effectiveness at £20 000 was very high (99%). CONCLUSIONS: PoNDER HV training was highly cost-effective in preventing symptoms of PND in a population of lower-risk women and cost-reducing over 6 months.
Funding
The PoNDER trial was funded by NHS Health Technology
Assessment, England; CH and MK inputs to the design and economic analysis
reported in this paper were funded by an NIHR Senior Investigator award to MK.
History
Citation
Psychological Medicine, 2018, pp. 1-11
Author affiliation
/Organisation/COLLEGE OF LIFE SCIENCES/School of Medicine/Department of Health Sciences
The supplementary material for this article can
be found at https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291718001940
Clinical trial registration number. ISRCTN92195776 (www.controlledtrials.com/ISRCTN92195776)