Economic Evaluation of Detection, Treatment, and Prevention Interventions for Perinatal Mood and Anxiety Disorders: A Systematic Literature Review
Author(s)
Sabrina Alam, MPH1, Emma McNeill, MS1, Man Tang, MS2, Rong Rong, MPhil2, Brian Christman, MS1, Abigail Gamble, PhD1, Qing Li, MD, DrPH3, William Hillegass, PhD1, Janice Hall, PhD4, Xu Xiong, MD, DrPH2, Laura Wright, MPH, MLIS2, Lizheng Shi, PhD2, Kyeryoung Lee, PhD5.
1University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, USA, 2Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, USA, 3University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA, 4Maternal Beats, LLC, Jackson, MS, USA, 5IMO health, New York, NY, USA.
1University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, USA, 2Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, USA, 3University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, CO, USA, 4Maternal Beats, LLC, Jackson, MS, USA, 5IMO health, New York, NY, USA.
Presentation Documents
OBJECTIVES: An estimated 15 - 21% of women are impacted by perinatal mood and anxiety disorders (PMADs). The purpose of this systematic review was to synthesize the evidence on the economic impact of interventions for the detection, treatment, and prevention of PMADs.
METHODS: Seven databases (i.e. PubMed, EconLit) were searched to identify studies matching the inclusion criteria (last search date: 12th March 2024). Two blinded reviewers independently screened each reference on Covidence. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards were used to assess reporting quality and the Consensus on Health Economics Criteria checklist was used to appraise the risk of bias. This review followed the PRISMA guidelines and is registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024528777).
RESULTS: The search identified 3,409 references. After deduplication, 1,610 unique titles and abstracts were screened, of which 55 full texts were assessed for eligibility. Twenty-four articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. Studies were from the United Kingdom (n=8), the United States (n=7), Australia (n=4), Canada (n=3), Singapore (n=1), or other (n=1). Studies included clinical trials (n=12), model-based (n=11), and cohort (n=1) designs. Characteristics of study participants (N=194,438) included those with general deliveries (n=185,605), low risk of depression (n=2,608), primiparous pregnancies (n=1,210), low socioeconomic status (n=1,093), high risk of depression (n=1,015), and diagnosed depression (n=209). The interventions focused on treatment [T] (n=12), prevention [P] (n=9), and detection [D] (n=4). Eighteen (75%) [8P, 7T, 2D, 1T+D] studies reported being cost-effective; 6 (25%) [4T, 1 P, 1D] were not cost-effective.
CONCLUSIONS: Interventions to address PMADs are economically viable and may lead to improved maternal mental health outcomes. Cost-effectiveness of such interventions could be impetus for policy decisions allocating future funding or resources to address mental health conditions in pregnant and postpartum populations. Future reviews are needed to examine equity considerations in the implementation of such programs.
METHODS: Seven databases (i.e. PubMed, EconLit) were searched to identify studies matching the inclusion criteria (last search date: 12th March 2024). Two blinded reviewers independently screened each reference on Covidence. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards were used to assess reporting quality and the Consensus on Health Economics Criteria checklist was used to appraise the risk of bias. This review followed the PRISMA guidelines and is registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024528777).
RESULTS: The search identified 3,409 references. After deduplication, 1,610 unique titles and abstracts were screened, of which 55 full texts were assessed for eligibility. Twenty-four articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. Studies were from the United Kingdom (n=8), the United States (n=7), Australia (n=4), Canada (n=3), Singapore (n=1), or other (n=1). Studies included clinical trials (n=12), model-based (n=11), and cohort (n=1) designs. Characteristics of study participants (N=194,438) included those with general deliveries (n=185,605), low risk of depression (n=2,608), primiparous pregnancies (n=1,210), low socioeconomic status (n=1,093), high risk of depression (n=1,015), and diagnosed depression (n=209). The interventions focused on treatment [T] (n=12), prevention [P] (n=9), and detection [D] (n=4). Eighteen (75%) [8P, 7T, 2D, 1T+D] studies reported being cost-effective; 6 (25%) [4T, 1 P, 1D] were not cost-effective.
CONCLUSIONS: Interventions to address PMADs are economically viable and may lead to improved maternal mental health outcomes. Cost-effectiveness of such interventions could be impetus for policy decisions allocating future funding or resources to address mental health conditions in pregnant and postpartum populations. Future reviews are needed to examine equity considerations in the implementation of such programs.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2025-05, ISPOR 2025, Montréal, Quebec, CA
Value in Health, Volume 28, Issue S1
Code
EE276
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Disease
No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas, SDC: Mental Health (including addition)