A Health Economic Evaluation of Daylight: A Digital Treatment for Anxiety in NHS South Yorkshire
Author(s)
Christopher Miller, PhD1, Harriet Fewster, PhD2, Ian Wood, MBChB1, Greig Thomson, BSc MSc1, Will Goddard, BA1, Angel Varghese, MSc2, Helen Stone, BSc3, Richard Flint, BSc MPH3, Joe Moss, PhD2.
1Big Health, London, United Kingdom, 2York Health Economics Consortium, York, United Kingdom, 3NHS South Yorkshire Integrated Care Board, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
1Big Health, London, United Kingdom, 2York Health Economics Consortium, York, United Kingdom, 3NHS South Yorkshire Integrated Care Board, Sheffield, United Kingdom.
OBJECTIVES: Assess the impact of Daylight, a digital cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) intervention for anxiety, on healthcare resource use and costs in UK NHS patients.
METHODS: A prospective observational matched case-control study using data collected by NHS South Yorkshire. Adults with anxiety or symptoms of anxiety who engaged with Daylight were matched to similar adults receiving standard anxiety care only. Daylight was positioned at Level 1 in the NICE pathway for anxiety to reflect real-world practice. Patients were matched using NHS-derived clinical demographics at baseline including age, sex, anxiety and depression status. Regression models estimated the impact of Daylight on total healthcare costs, including medication use and NHS resource utilization (e.g., GP appointments).
RESULTS: Over 1,300 patients used Daylight from September 2024 to May 2025. Most patients were recruited via general practice (71%), with the remainder through self-referral and other sources. Daylight patients were largely female (78%) and white (90%), with the largest age group 31-50 years (47%), followed by 51-64 (25%), 18-30 (21%), and 65+ (6%). The mean baseline GAD-7 score was 13.2 (SD 4.6), indicating moderate-to-severe anxiety. Eighty-one percent reported reduced tension after the first technique, and 67% practiced at least one technique outside of Daylight. Daylight patients were similar to those who present for anxiety management in NHS South Yorkshire. For the matched sample (343 Daylight patients, 343 controls to date), baseline characteristics were similar for: mean age (46 vs 47), sex (73% vs 74% female), prior depression (25% vs 26%), further medical comorbidity (7% vs 7%), and any medication use (71% vs 66%).
CONCLUSIONS: NHS data collection and analysis are ongoing. Early uptake and engagement with Daylight are promising. These preliminary findings demonstrate the feasibility of the study and support further evaluation of Daylight’s potential to improve patient outcomes and reduce NHS resource use and costs.
METHODS: A prospective observational matched case-control study using data collected by NHS South Yorkshire. Adults with anxiety or symptoms of anxiety who engaged with Daylight were matched to similar adults receiving standard anxiety care only. Daylight was positioned at Level 1 in the NICE pathway for anxiety to reflect real-world practice. Patients were matched using NHS-derived clinical demographics at baseline including age, sex, anxiety and depression status. Regression models estimated the impact of Daylight on total healthcare costs, including medication use and NHS resource utilization (e.g., GP appointments).
RESULTS: Over 1,300 patients used Daylight from September 2024 to May 2025. Most patients were recruited via general practice (71%), with the remainder through self-referral and other sources. Daylight patients were largely female (78%) and white (90%), with the largest age group 31-50 years (47%), followed by 51-64 (25%), 18-30 (21%), and 65+ (6%). The mean baseline GAD-7 score was 13.2 (SD 4.6), indicating moderate-to-severe anxiety. Eighty-one percent reported reduced tension after the first technique, and 67% practiced at least one technique outside of Daylight. Daylight patients were similar to those who present for anxiety management in NHS South Yorkshire. For the matched sample (343 Daylight patients, 343 controls to date), baseline characteristics were similar for: mean age (46 vs 47), sex (73% vs 74% female), prior depression (25% vs 26%), further medical comorbidity (7% vs 7%), and any medication use (71% vs 66%).
CONCLUSIONS: NHS data collection and analysis are ongoing. Early uptake and engagement with Daylight are promising. These preliminary findings demonstrate the feasibility of the study and support further evaluation of Daylight’s potential to improve patient outcomes and reduce NHS resource use and costs.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2025-11, ISPOR Europe 2025, Glasgow, Scotland
Value in Health, Volume 28, Issue S2
Code
EE19
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Topic Subcategory
Cost/Cost of Illness/Resource Use Studies
Disease
Mental Health (including addition), No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas