Cost-Effectiveness of a Culturally Adapted Manual-Assisted Brief Psychological Intervention for Self-Harm in Pakistan: A Secondary Analysis of the Culturally Adapted Manual-Assisted Brief Psychological Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Self-harm is a serious public health problem. A culturally adapted manual-assisted problem-solving training (C-MAP) intervention improved and sustained a reduction in suicidal ideation, hopelessness, and depression compared with treatment as usual (TAU) alone. Here, we evaluate its cost-effectiveness. METHODS: Patients admitted after an episode of self-harm were randomized individually to either C-MAP plus TAU or TAU alone in Karachi. Improvement in health-related quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) was measured using the EQ-5D with 3 levels instrument at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months after randomization. The primary economic outcome was health service cost per QALY gained as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, based on 2019 US$ and a 6-month time horizon. Nonparametric bootstrapping was used to assess uncertainties and sensitivity analysis to examine the impact of hospitalization costs. RESULTS: A total of 108 and 113 participants were enrolled among the intervention and standard arms, respectively. The intervention resulted in 0.04 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.00-0.08) more QALYs 6 months after enrolment. The mean cost per participant in the intervention arm was $1001 (95% CI 968-1031), resulting in an incremental cost of the intervention of $640 (95% CI 595-679). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the C-MAP intervention versus TAU was $16 254 (95% CI 7116-99 057) per QALY gained. The probability that C-MAP is cost-effective was between 66% and 83% for cost-effective thresholds between $20 000 and $30 000. Cost-effectiveness results remained robust to sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: C-MAP may be a valuable self-harm intervention. Further studies with longer follow-up and larger sample sizes are needed to draw reliable conclusions.

Cost-Effectiveness of a Culturally Adapted Manual-Assisted Brief Psychological Intervention for Self-Harm in Pakistan: A Secondary Analysis of the Culturally Adapted Manual-Assisted Problem-Solving Training Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: Self-harm is a serious public health problem. A culturally adapted manual-assisted problem-solving training (C-MAP) intervention improved and sustained the reduction in suicidal ideation, hopelessness, and depression compared with treatment as usual (TAU) alone. Here, we evaluate its cost-effectiveness. METHODS: Patients admitted after an episode of self-harm were randomized individually to either C-MAP plus TAU or TAU alone in Karachi. Improvement in health-related quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) was measured using the Euro Qol-5D-3L instrument at baseline and at 3 months and 6 months after randomization. The primary economic outcome was health service cost per QALY gained as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, based on 2019 US dollars and a 6-month time horizon. Nonparametric bootstrapping was used to assess uncertainties, and sensitivity analysis to examine the impact of hospitalization costs. RESULTS: A total of 108 and 113 participants were enrolled among the intervention and standard arms, respectively. The intervention resulted in 0.04 more QALYs (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.00-0.08) 6 months after enrolment. The mean cost per participant in the intervention arm was US $1001 (95% CI 968-1031), resulting in an incremental cost of the intervention of US $640 (95% CI 595-679). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the C-MAP intervention versus TAU was US $16 254 (95% CI 7116-99 057) per QALY gained. The probability that C-MAP is cost-effective was between 66% and 83% for cost-effective thresholds between US $20 000 and US $30 000. Cost-effectiveness results remained robust to sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: C-MAP may be a valuable self-harm intervention. Further studies with longer follow-up and larger sample sizes are needed to draw reliable conclusions.

A randomised double-blind placebo-controlled 12- week feasibility trial of methotrexate added to treatment as usual in early schizophrenia: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Methotrexate is a commonly used anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive drug. There is growing evidence that inflammatory processes are involved in the pathogenesis of schizophrenia. In our recent randomised double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial in Pakistan and Brazil, the addition of minocycline (antibiotic and anti-inflammatory drug) for 1 year to treatment as usual reduced negative symptoms and improved some cognitive measures. A meta-analysis of cytokine changes in the peripheral blood has identified IL-2, IFN-gamma, TNF-alpha and soluble IL-2 receptor as trait markers of schizophrenia because their levels were elevated during acute exacerbations and reduced in remission. This suggests immune activation and an inflammatory syndrome in schizophrenia. Based on the evidence of the strong anti-inflammatory properties of methotrexate, we propose that low-dose methotrexate may be an effective therapy in early schizophrenia. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a double-blind placebo-controlled study of methotrexate added to treatment as usual for patients suffering from schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, psychosis not otherwise specified or schizophreniform disorder. This will be with 72 patients, 36 in each arm over 3 months. There will be screening, randomisation and follow-up visits. Full clinical assessments will be carried out at baseline, 2, 4, 8 and 12 weeks. Social and cognitive assessments will be carried out at baseline and 12 weeks. Methotrexate will be given at a dose of 10 mgs orally once a week for a 3-month period. DISCUSSION: Evidence suggests inflammatory processes are involved in the pathogenesis of schizophrenia and anti-inflammatory treatments have shown to have some beneficial effects. Methotrexate is a known immunosuppressant and anti-inflammatory drug. The aim of this study is to establish the degree of improvement in positive and negative symptoms, as well as cognitive functioning with the addition of methotrexate to treatment as usual.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02074319 (24 February 2014).