Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39437382›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2024

A Universal Digital Stress Management Intervention for Employees: Randomized Controlled Trial with Health-Economic Evaluation.

Johanna Freund, Filip Smit, Dirk Lehr, Anna-Carlotta Zarski, Matthias Berking, Heleen Riper, Burkhardt Funk, David Daniel Ebert, Claudia Buntrock

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Johanna FreundDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0038-9330
Filip SmitDepartment of Mental Health and Prevention, Trimbos Institute, Utrecht, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9479-3600
Dirk LehrDepartment of Health Psychology and Applied Biological Psychology, Leuphana University of Lueneburg, Lueneburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5560-3605
Anna-Carlotta ZarskiDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0517-6668
Matthias BerkingDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5903-4748
Heleen RiperDepartment of Clinical, Neuro and Developmental Psychology, VU University, Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-8144-8901
Burkhardt FunkInstitute of Information Systems, Leuphana University of Lueneburg, Lueneburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5855-2666
David Daniel EbertSchool of Medicine and Health, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6820-0146
Claudia BuntrockDepartment of Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4974-5455

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStress is highly prevalent and known to be a risk factor for a wide range of physical and mental disorders. The effectiveness of digital stress management interventions has been confirmed; however, research on its economic merits is still limited.

objectiveThis study aims to assess the cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, and cost-benefit of a universal digital stress management intervention for employees compared with a waitlist control condition within a time horizon of 6 months.

methodsRecruitment was directed at the German working population. A sample of 396 employees was randomly assigned to the intervention group (n=198) or the waitlist control condition (WLC) group (n=198). The digital stress management intervention included 7 sessions plus 1 booster session, which was offered without therapeutic guidance. Health service use, patient and family expenditures, and productivity losses were self-assessed and used for costing from a societal and an employer's perspective. Costs were related to symptom-free status (PSS-10 [Perceived Stress Scale] score 2 SDs below the study population baseline mean) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. The sampling error was handled using nonparametric bootstrapping.

resultsFrom a societal perspective, the digital intervention was likely to be dominant compared with WLC, with a 56% probability of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay (WTP) of €0 per symptom-free person gained. At the same WTP threshold, the digital intervention had a probability of 55% being cost-effective per QALY gained relative to the WLC. This probability increased to 80% at a societal WTP of €20,000 per QALY gained. Taking the employer's perspective, the digital intervention showed a probability of a positive return on investment of 78%.

conclusionsDigital preventive stress management for employees appears to be cost-effective societally and provides a favorable return on investment for employers.

trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register DRKS00005699; https://drks.de/search/en/trial/DRKS00005699.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisStress, PsychologicalAdultFemaleGermanyHumansMaleMiddle AgedQuality-Adjusted Life Yearscost-benefitcost-effectivenesscost-utilityeconomic evaluationemployeesinternet-basedreturn-on-investmentstress managementuniversal prevention

Identifiers

PMID39437382
PMCPMC11538874

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.