Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a socioculturally adapted collaborative depression care program among low-income Hispanics with diabetes. Research design and methods: A randomized controlled trial of 387 patients with diabetes (96.5% Hispanic) with clinically significant depression followed over 18 months evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the Multifaceted Diabetes and Depression Program aimed at increasing patient exposure to evidence-based depression psychotherapy and/or pharmacotherapy in two public safety net clinics. Patient medical care costs and utilization were captured from Los Angeles County Department of Health Services claims records. Patient-reported outcomes included Short-Form Health Survey-12 and Patient Health Questionnaire-9-calculated depression-free days. Results: Intervention patients had significantly greater Short-Form Health Survey-12 utility improvement from baseline compared with controls over the 18-month evaluation period (4.8%; P < 0.001) and a corresponding significant improvement in depression-free days (43.0; P < 0.001). Medical cost differences were not statistically significant in ordinary least squares and log-transformed cost regressions. The average costs of the Multifaceted Diabetes and Depression Program study intervention were $515 per patient. The program's cost-effectiveness averaged $4053 per quality-adjusted life-year per MDDP recipient and was more than 90% likely to fall below $12,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Conclusions: Socioculturally adapted collaborative depression care improved utility and quality of life in predominantly low-income Hispanic patients with diabetes and was highly cost-effective. Copyright © 2012, International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc.
Hay, J. W., Katon, W. J., Ell, K., Lee, P. J., & Guterman, J. J. (2012). Cost-effectiveness analysis of collaborative care management of major depression among low-income, predominantly Hispanics with diabetes. Value in Health, 15(2), 249–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2011.09.008