Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness analysis of psychosocial intervention for early stage schizophrenia in China: a randomized, one-year study.

ABSTRACT: A combination of psychosocial interventions and medications has been highly recommended as a successful treatment package for schizophrenia. Its cost-effectiveness has not been fully explored yet. The aim of the present analysis was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of antipsychotics combined with psychosocial treatment and treatment as usual for patients with early-stage schizophrenia.Patients with schizophrenia (N = 1, 268) were assigned to the combination of medication and psychosocial intervention or treatment as usual for up to 12 months. Cost analysis included direct medical costs, direct nonmedical costs and indirect costs. Quality-adjusted life year (QALY) ratings were assessed with Short- Form 6D.Average monthly psychosocial intervention costs for combined treatment were higher than treatment as usual (p = 0.005), but no significant differences were found in direct costs, indirect costs, and total costs between two groups (all p-values ? 0.556). Combined treatment was associated with significant higher QALY ratings than treatment as usual (p = 0.039). Compared with treatment as usual, combined treatment resulted in a gain of 0.031 QALY ratings at an additional cost of US$ 56.4, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of US$ 1819.4 per QALY gained.Despite some limitations, our results supported that medication combined with psychosocial treatment was more cost-effective than treatment as usual for patients with early-stage schizophrenia.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00654576.

SUBMITTER: Zhang Z

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4149262 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cost-effectiveness analysis of psychosocial intervention for early stage schizophrenia in China: a randomized, one-year study.

Zhang Zhanchou Z Zhai Jinguo J Wei Qinling Q Qi Jingfeng J Guo Xiaofeng X Zhao Jingping J

BMC psychiatry 20140726

<h4>Background</h4>A combination of psychosocial interventions and medications has been highly recommended as a successful treatment package for schizophrenia. Its cost-effectiveness has not been fully explored yet. The aim of the present analysis was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of antipsychotics combined with psychosocial treatment and treatment as usual for patients with early-stage schizophrenia.<h4>Method</h4>Patients with schizophrenia (N = 1, 268) were assigned to the combination of ...[more]

PMID: 25064681

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundInformation on cost-effectiveness of interventions to treat schizophrenia can assist health policy decision making, particularly given the lack of health resources in developing countries like Thailand. This study aims to determine the optimal treatment package, including drug and non-drug interventions, for schizophrenia in Thailand.MethodsA Markov model was used to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of typical antipsychotics, generic risperidone, olanzapine, clozapine and family interventions. Health outcomes were measured in disability adjusted life years. We evaluated intervention benefit by estimating a change in disease severity, taking into account potential side effects. Intervention costs included outpatient treatment costs, hospitalization costs as well as time and travel costs of patients and families. Uncertainty was evaluated using Monte Carlo simulation. A sensitivity analysis of the expected range cost of generic risperidone was undertaken.ResultsGeneric risperidone is more cost-effective than typicals if it can be produced for less than 10 baht per 2 mg tablet. Risperidone was the cheapest treatment with higher drug costs offset by lower hospital costs in comparison to typicals. The most cost-effective combination of treatments was a combination of risperidone (dominant intervention). Adding family intervention has an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 1,900 baht/DALY with a 100% probability of a result less than a threshold for very cost-effective interventions of one times GDP or 110,000 baht per DALY. Treating the most severe one third of patients with clozapine instead of risperidone had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 320,000 baht/DALY with just over 50% probability of a result below three times GDP per capita.ConclusionsThere are good economic arguments to recommend generic risperidone as first line treatment in combination with family intervention. As the uncertainty interval indicates the addition of clozapine may be dominated and there are serious side effects, treating severe patients with clozapine is advisable only for patients who do not respond to risperidone and only in the presence of a stricter side effect monitoring system than currently exists.

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess the cost utility of early psychosocial intervention for patients with Alzheimer's disease and their primary caregivers.DesignCost utility evaluation alongside a multicentre, randomised controlled trial with 3 years of follow-up.SettingPrimary care and memory clinics in five Danish districts.Participants330 community-dwelling patients and their primary caregivers.InterventionPsychosocial counselling and support lasting 8-12 months after diagnosis and follow-up at 3, 6, 12 and 36 months in the intervention group or follow-up only in the control group.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome measure was the cost of additional quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs were measured from a societal perspective, including the costs of healthcare, social care, informal care and production loss. QALYs were estimated separately for the patient and the caregiver before aggregation for the main analysis.ResultsNone of the observed cost and QALY measures were significantly different between the intervention and control groups, although a tendency was noted for psychosocial care leading to cost increases with informal care that was not outweighed by the tendency for cost savings with formal care. The probability of psychosocial intervention being cost-effective did not exceed 36% for any threshold value. The alternative scenario analysis showed that the probability of cost-effectiveness increased over the range of threshold values used if the cost perspective was restricted to formal healthcare.ConclusionsA multifaceted, psychosocial intervention programme was found unlikely to be cost-effective from a societal perspective. The recommendation for practice in settings that are similar to the Danish setting is to provide follow-up with referral to available local support programmes when needed, and to restrict large multifaceted intervention programmes to patients and caregivers with special needs until further evidence for cost-effectiveness emerges.Trial registrationThe study was registered in the Clinical Trial Database as ISRCTN74848736.

Project description:BackgroundIn Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, China, an estimated 80% of newly-identified antiretroviral therapy (ART)-eligible patients are not engaged in ART. Delayed ART uptake ultimately translates into high rates of HIV morbidity, mortality, and transmission. To enhance HIV testing receipt and subsequent treatment uptake in Guangxi, the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) executed a cluster-randomized trial to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a streamlined HIV testing algorithm (the One4All intervention) in 12 county-level hospitals.ObjectiveTo determine the incremental cost-effectiveness of the One4All intervention delivered at county hospitals in Guangxi, China, compared to the current standard of care (SOC).PerspectiveHealth System.Time horizon1-, 5-and 25-years.MethodsWe adapted a dynamic, compartmental HIV transmission model to simulate HIV transmission and progression in Guangxi, China and identify the economic impact and health benefits of implementing the One4All intervention in all Guangxi hospitals. The One4All intervention algorithm entails rapid point-of-care HIV screening, CD4 and viral load testing of individuals presenting for HIV screening, with same-day results and linkage to counselling. We populated the model with data from the One4All trial (CTN-0056), China CDC HIV registry and published reports. Model outcomes were HIV incidence, mortality, costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the One4All intervention compared to SOC.ResultsThe One4All testing intervention was more costly than SOC (CNY 2,182 vs. CNY 846), but facilitated earlier ART access, resulting in delayed disease progression and mortality. Over a 25-year time horizon, we estimated that introducing One4All in Guangxi would result in 802 averted HIV cases and 1629 averted deaths at an ICER of CNY 11,678 per QALY gained. Sensitivity analysis revealed that One4All remained cost-effective at even minimal levels of effectiveness. Results were robust to changes to a range of parameters characterizing the HIV epidemic over time.ConclusionsThe One4All HIV testing strategy was highly cost-effective by WHO standards, and should be prioritized for widespread implementation in Guangxi, China. Integrating the intervention within a broader combination prevention strategy would enhance the public health response to HIV/AIDS in Guangxi.

Dataset Information

Cost-effectiveness analysis of psychosocial intervention for early stage schizophrenia in China: a randomized, one-year study.

Publications

Cost-effectiveness analysis of psychosocial intervention for early stage schizophrenia in China: a randomized, one-year study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure