Abstract

Introduction Perinatal depression in low- and middle-income countries is a global health concern. Interventions to support women suffering from perinatal depression using mental health specialists, such as the WHO Thinking Healthy Programme (WHO-THP), are established but may not be scalable in resource-constrained settings. The technology-assisted peer-delivered THP (THP-TAP) has been developed as a potential solution to deliver an intervention at scale. This study assesses whether the THP-TAP is cost-effective compared with the WHO-THP in Pakistan. Method Using data for 980 pregnant women from a cluster-randomised non-inferiority trial in Pakistan, we conducted a within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis of THP-TAP compared with WHO-THP. Health outcomes are quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) and costs in US$ (2022). Costs collected included intervention delivery costs and wider healthcare resource use costs. The trial intervention delivery costs were adapted to ‘real-world’ intervention delivery costs using evidence and assumptions. Uncertainty was explored through scenario and sensitivity analyses. Results During the trial, the mean patient QALYs were 0.683 (0.681, 0.685) for WHO-THP and 0.688 (0.686, 0.690) for THP-TAP, resulting in an incremental increase in QALYs of 0.005 (0.002, 0.008). The mean per patient costs were $279 ($268, $290) for WHO-THP and $227 for THP-TAP ($218, $236), resulting in an incremental cost of −$52 (−67, −$38). The per patient delivery costs were estimated at $44 and $24 in the real-world scenario, whereas in the trial they were $59 and $69, for WHO-THP and THP-TAP, respectively. THP-TAP is both more effective and less costly than WHO-THP. These results were robust when considering parameter uncertainty and across various scenarios. Conclusions Our analysis suggests that THP-TAP could represent a scalable, health-improving and cost-saving intervention to support those with perinatal depression, when compared with WHO-THP.