RTI uses cookies to offer you the best experience online. By clicking “accept” on this website, you opt in and you agree to the use of cookies. If you would like to know more about how RTI uses cookies and how to manage them please view our Privacy Policy here. You can “opt out” or change your mind by visiting: http://optout.aboutads.info/. Click “accept” to agree.
Cost-utility of group acceptance and commitment therapy for fibromyalgia versus recommended drugs
An economic analysis alongside a 6-month randomized controlled trial conducted in Spain (EFFIGACT Study)
Luciano, J. V., D'Amico, F., Feliu-Soler, A., McCracken, L. M., Aguado, J., Peñarrubia-María, M. T., Knapp, M., Serrano-Blanco, A., & García-Campayo, J. (2017). Cost-utility of group acceptance and commitment therapy for fibromyalgia versus recommended drugs: An economic analysis alongside a 6-month randomized controlled trial conducted in Spain (EFFIGACT Study). Journal of Pain, 18(7), 868-880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2017.03.001
The aim of this study was to analyze the cost utility of a group-based form of acceptance and commitment therapy (GACT) in patients with fibromyalgia (FM) compared with patients receiving recommended pharmacological treatment (RPT) or on a waiting list (WL). The data were derived from a previously published study, a randomized controlled trial that focused on clinical outcomes. Health economic outcomes included health-related quality of life and health care use at baseline and at 6-month follow-up using the EuroQoL and the Client Service Receipt Inventory, respectively. Analyses included quality-adjusted life years, direct and indirect cost differences, and incremental cost effectiveness ratios. A total of 156 FM patients were randomized (51 GACT, 52 RPT, 53 WL). GACTwas related to significantly less direct costs over the 6-month study period compared with both control arms (GACT (sic)824.2 +/- 1,062.7 vs RPT (sic)1,730.7 +/- 1,656.8 vs WL (sic)2,462.7 +/- 2,822.0). Lower direct costs for GACT compared with RPT were due to lower costs from primary care visits and FM-related medications. The incremental cost effectiveness ratios were dominant in the completers' analysis and remained robust in the sensitivity analyses. In conclusion, acceptance and commitment therapy appears to be a cost-effective treatment compared with RPT in patients with FM. Perspective: Decision-makers have to prioritize their budget on the treatment option that is the most cost effective for the management of a specific patient group. From government as well as health care perspectives, this study shows that a GACT is more cost effective than pharmacological treatment in management of FM. (C) 2017 by the American Pain Society