東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Cost-benefit analysis of cognitive b...

Wald, Lana M.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Cost-benefit analysis of cognitive behavioral therapy versus light therapy for seasonal affective disorder.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Cost-benefit analysis of cognitive behavioral therapy versus light therapy for seasonal affective disorder./
Author:	Wald, Lana M.
Description:	76 p.
Notes:	Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 53-06.
Contained By:	Masters Abstracts International53-06(E).
Subject:	Counseling Psychology. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=1567625
ISBN:	9781321284942

Cost-benefit analysis of cognitive behavioral therapy versus light therapy for seasonal affective disorder.
Wald, Lana M.

Cost-benefit analysis of cognitive behavioral therapy versus light therapy for seasonal affective disorder. - 76 p.

Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 53-06.

Thesis (M.A.)--American University, 2014.

This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.

A cost-benefit analysis within a major clinical trial compared two therapeutic modalities, CBT and LT, for the treatment of SAD. Resources devoted to treatment by both providers and patients (i.e., costs), and changes in productivity and health care utilization by patients (i.e., outcomes), were monetized and assessed. Pretreatment sample size equaled 145 patients (CBT = 76, LT = 69); 135 at one-year follow-up (CBT = 72, LT = 63). From the perspective of treatment providers, total cost per patient to conduct the 6-week treatment averaged $229.35 for CBT and $121.06 for LT. From the perspective of the patient, cost averaged $663.36 for CBT and $898.30 for LT, per patient. After initial 6-week treatment was completed, additional CBT cost was nil, while LT continued to require both provider and patients' time. Patients in the CBT condition used fewer emergency room services by one-year follow-up (U (134) = 1,928, p = .033) and the total ER cost was less ( U (134) = 1,925, p = .031) than those treated with LT. Net benefit was significantly less than zero from the patient perspective (CBT = -$518.16, p = .013; LT = -$607.90, p = .007) and from the combined patient and provider perspective (CBT = -$747.51, p = .003; LT = -$728.96, p = .003). However, when comparing the net benefit of CBT versus LT, from both perspectives, differences were not significant. Significant differences may become apparent as LT users continue to require treatment during the second and subsequent winters following initial treatment while those treated with CBT may not.

ISBN: 9781321284942Subjects--Topical Terms:

2122842
Counseling Psychology.

Cost-benefit analysis of cognitive behavioral therapy versus light therapy for seasonal affective disorder.
LDR:02548nmm a2200313 4500 001 2058503
005 20150716112041.5
008 170521s2014 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781321284942
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI1567625
035 $a AAI1567625
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Wald, Lana M. $3 3172460
245 1 0 $a Cost-benefit analysis of cognitive behavioral therapy versus light therapy for seasonal affective disorder.
300 $a 76 p.
500 $a Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 53-06.
500 $a Adviser: Brian T. Yates.
502 $a Thesis (M.A.)--American University, 2014.
506 $a This item must not be sold to any third party vendors.
520 $a A cost-benefit analysis within a major clinical trial compared two therapeutic modalities, CBT and LT, for the treatment of SAD. Resources devoted to treatment by both providers and patients (i.e., costs), and changes in productivity and health care utilization by patients (i.e., outcomes), were monetized and assessed. Pretreatment sample size equaled 145 patients (CBT = 76, LT = 69); 135 at one-year follow-up (CBT = 72, LT = 63). From the perspective of treatment providers, total cost per patient to conduct the 6-week treatment averaged $229.35 for CBT and $121.06 for LT. From the perspective of the patient, cost averaged $663.36 for CBT and $898.30 for LT, per patient. After initial 6-week treatment was completed, additional CBT cost was nil, while LT continued to require both provider and patients' time. Patients in the CBT condition used fewer emergency room services by one-year follow-up (U (134) = 1,928, p = .033) and the total ER cost was less ( U (134) = 1,925, p = .031) than those treated with LT. Net benefit was significantly less than zero from the patient perspective (CBT = -$518.16, p = .013; LT = -$607.90, p = .007) and from the combined patient and provider perspective (CBT = -$747.51, p = .003; LT = -$728.96, p = .003). However, when comparing the net benefit of CBT versus LT, from both perspectives, differences were not significant. Significant differences may become apparent as LT users continue to require treatment during the second and subsequent winters following initial treatment while those treated with CBT may not.
590 $a School code: 0008.
650 4 $a Counseling Psychology. $3 2122842
650 4 $a Cognitive psychology. $3 523881
650 4 $a Behavioral psychology. $3 2122788
650 4 $a Clinical psychology. $3 524863
690 $a 0603
690 $a 0633
690 $a 0384
690 $a 0622
710 2 $a American University. $b Psychology. $3 2093510
773 0 $t Masters Abstracts International $g 53-06(E).
790 $a 0008
791 $a M.A.
792 $a 2014
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=1567625