Cited by 11Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeCardiac Health and Mental HealthMental Health Treatment and Access

Depression screening with patient-targeted feedback in cardiology: The cost-effectiveness of DEPSCREEN-INFO.

Open access
Brettschneider, Christian, Kohlmann, Sebastian, Gierk, Benjamin, Löwe, Bernd, König, Hans-Helmut·2017·PLoS ONE

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although depression is common in patients with heart disease, screening for depression is much debated. DEPSCREEN-INFO showed that a patient-targeted feedback in addition to screening results in lower depression level six months after screening. The purpose of this analysis was to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of DEPSCREEN-INFO. METHODS: Patients with coronary heart disease or arterial hypertension were included. Participants in both groups were screened for depression. Participants in the intervention group additionally received a patient-targeted feedback of their result and recommended treatment options. A cost-utility analysis using quality-adjusted life years (QALY) based on the EQ-5D was performed. The time horizon was 6 months. Resource utilization was assessed by a telephone interview. Multiple imputation using chained equations was used. Net-benefit regressions controlled for prognostic variables at baseline were performed to construct cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Different sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: 375 participants (intervention group: 155; control group: 220) were included at baseline. After 6 months, in the intervention group adjusted total costs were lower (-€2,098; SE: €1,717) and more QALY were gained (0.0067; SD: 0.0133); yet differences were not statistically significant. The probability of cost-effectiveness was around 80% independent of the willingness-to-pay (range: €0/QALY-€130,000/QALY). The results were robust. CONCLUSIONS: A patient-targeted feedback in addition to depression screening in cardiology is cost-effective with a high probability. This underpins the use of the patient-targeted feedbacks and the PHQ-9 that are both freely available and easy to implement in routine care.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0181021

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [8]National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) (2009) Depression in adults with a chronic physical health problem: Treatment and management London: NICE. 31886974
  2. [33]Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, O´Brien BJ, Stoddart GL (2005) Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  3. [40]DGPPN, BÄK, KBV, AWMF (2010) Nationale Versorgungsleitlinie Unipolare Depression. Berlin: Springer.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brettschneider, C., Kohlmann, S., Gierk, B., Löwe, B., & König, H.-H.
Affiliations
  • University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (DE)
  • Schön Klinik Hamburg Eilbek (DE)
Corresponding author
Brettschneider, Christian
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2017-08-14
Volume
12
Issue
8
Pages
e0181021
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2749319144
Cited by
11
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 4
FWCI
1.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (01GX1004)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Health and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
depression screening, cost-effectiveness, coronary artery disease, hypertension, PHQ-9, quality-adjusted life years, EQ-5D, cardiac patients
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Cardiology, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Depression, Feedback, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Mass Screening, Middle Aged, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Quality of Life, Quality-Adjusted Life Years

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review