Cost-effectiveness of a preferred intensity exercise programme for young people with depression compared with treatment as usual: An economic evaluation alongside a clinical trial in the UK

Carter, Tim; Turner, David; Sach, Tracey; Guo, Boliang; Callaghan, Patrick

Abstract

© 2017 BMJ Publishing Group. All Rights Reserved. Objectives To assess the cost-effectiveness of preferred intensity exercise programme for young people with depression compared with a treatment as usual control group. Design A ‘within trial’ cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis conducted alongside a randomised controlled trial. The perspective of the analysis was the UK National Health Service and social services. setting The intervention was provided in a community leisure centre setting. Participants 86 young people aged 14–17 years attending Tier 2 and Tier 3 CAMHS (Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services) outpatient services presenting with depression. Interventions The intervention comprised 12 separate sessions of circuit training over a 6-week period. Sessions were supervised by a qualified exercise therapist. Participants also received treatment as usual. The comparator group received treatment as usual. results We found improvements in the Children’s Depression Inventory-2 (CDI-2) and estimated cost-effectiveness at £61 per point improvement in CDI-2 for the exercise group compared with control. We found no evidence that the exercise intervention led to differences in quality-adjusted life years (QALY). QALYs were estimated using the EQ-5D-5L (5-level version of EuroQol-5 dimension). conclusions There is evidence that exercise can be an effective intervention for adolescents with depression and the current study shows that preferred intensity exercise could also represent a cost-effective intervention in terms of the CDI-2.

Citation

Carter, T., Turner, D., Sach, T., Guo, B., & Callaghan, P. (2017). Cost-effectiveness of a preferred intensity exercise programme for young people with depression compared with treatment as usual: An economic evaluation alongside a clinical trial in the UK. BMJ Open, 7(11), e016211. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016211

• Journal Article Type: Article
• Acceptance Date: Sep 5, 2017
• Online Publication Date: Nov 26, 2017
• Publication Date: Nov 26, 2017
• Deposit Date: Sep 20, 2017
• Publicly Available Date: Jan 28, 2019
• Journal: BMJ Open
• Electronic ISSN: 2044-6055
• Publisher: BMJ Publishing Group
• Peer Reviewed: Peer Reviewed
• Volume: 7
• Issue: 11
• Article Number: e016211
• Pages: e016211
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016211
• Public URL: https://nottingham-repository.worktribe.com/output/1126044
• Publisher URL: https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/7/11/e016211