Show simple item record

FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorDieng, Mbathio
dc.contributor.authorCust, Anne E
dc.contributor.authorKasparian, Nadine A
dc.contributor.authorMann, Graham J
dc.contributor.authorMorton, Rachael L
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-04
dc.date.available2017-05-04
dc.date.issued2016-01-27
dc.identifier.citationDieng M, Cust AE, Kasparian NA, Mann GJ, Morton RL. Economic evaluations of psychosocial interventions in cancer: a systematic review. Psycho-Oncology 2016; 25(12): 1380-1392.en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2123/16707
dc.description.abstractObjective: 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 to assess the cost-effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for improving psychological adjustment among people with cancer. Methods: Systematic review of the literature, study 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 the six psychosocial interventions identified as cost-effective, 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. Future research should include a clear definition of the economic question, inclusion of all relevant costs, and consideration of utility-based quality of life measures for QALY estimation. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42014006370.en
dc.publisherWileyen
dc.rightsOther
dc.subjectcanceren
dc.subjecteconomic evaluationen
dc.subjectcost-effectivenessen
dc.subjectquality of lifeen
dc.subjectpsychosocialen
dc.titleEconomic evaluations of psychosocial interventions in cancer: A systematic reviewen
dc.typeArticleen
dc.type.pubtypePost-printen
usyd.facultyFaculty of Medicine and Health, NHMRC Clinical Trials Centreen


Show simple item record

Associated file/s

Associated collections

Show simple item record

There are no previous versions of the item available.