Cost-utility and cost consequence of a telehealth intervention targeting improvement in addictive eating for Australian adults (the TRACE program).

Background The TRACE (Targeted Research for Addictive and Compulsive Eating) intervention was evaluated in a 3-month randomized controlled trial which demonstrated significant improvement in Yale Food Addiction Scale scores favoring dietitian-led telehealth (active intervention) compared with passive and control groups. This study aimed to determine intervention costs and cost-utility. Methods Costs of each intervention (2021$AUD) and incremental net monetary benefit (iNMB; incremental benefit, defined as Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALY) gained, multiplied by willingness to pay threshold minus incremental cost) were calculated to estimate differences between groups. Results The active intervention (n = 38) cost $294 (95% UI: $266, $316) per person compared to $47 (95% UI: $40, $54) in the passive intervention (n = 24), and $26 in the control group (n = 37). At a cost-effectiveness threshold of $50 000 per QALY score gained, the active intervention iNMB was -$186 (95% UI: -$1137, $834) and the passive group $127 (95% UI: -$1137, $834). Compared to the control group, estimates indicate a 30% chance of the active intervention, and a 60% chance of the passive intervention being cost effective. Conclusion Although the overall cost of the active intervention was low, this was not considered cost-effective in comparison to the passive intervention, given small QALY score gains. Trial registration Australia New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry ACTRN12621001079831. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]