Cost-effectiveness of a psychoeducational relapse prevention program for depression in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Major depression is a prevalent mental disorder with a high risk of relapses and recurrences, which are associated with considerable burden for patients and high costs for society. Despite these negative consequences, only few studies have focused on interventions aimed at the prevention of recurrences in primary care patients with depression. AIMS OF THE STUDY: To assess the cost-effectiveness of a psychoeducational prevention program (PEP) aimed at improving the long-term outcome of depression in primary care. METHODS: Recruitment took place in the northern part of the Netherlands, patients were referred by general practitioners. In total 267 patients were included in the study and randomly assigned to usual care (UC) or UC with one of three forms of PEP; PEP alone, psychiatric consultation followed by PEP (psychiatrist-enhanced PEP), and cognitive behavioral therapy followed by PEP (CBT-enhanced PEP). Costs and health outcomes were registered at three month intervals during the 36 months follow-up of the study. Primary outcome measure was the proportion of depression-free time. RESULTS: Mean total costs during the 36 months of the study were 8200 euros in the UC group, 9816 euros in the PEP group, 9844 euros in the psychiatrist-enhanced PEP group, and 9254 euros in the CBT-enhanced PEP group. Costs of productivity losses, hospital admissions, contacts with regional institutions for mental healthcare, and medication use contributed substantially to the total costs in each group. Results of the primary outcome measure were less positive for PEP than for UC, but slightly better in the enhanced PEP groups. If decision-makers are willing to pay up to 300 euros for an additional proportion of depression-free time, UC is most likely to be the optimal intervention. For higher willingness to pay, CBT-enhanced PEP seems most efficient. DISCUSSION: The basic PEP intervention was not cost-effective in comparison with UC. The economic impact of productivity losses associated with depression, and the importance of including these costs in economic studies, was illustrated by the findings of this study. Due to the drop-out of patients during the 36 months follow-up period, economic analyses had to account for missing data, which may complicate the interpretation of the results. Although Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) could not be assessed for all the patients, the results of analyses focusing on QALYs supported the overall conclusion that PEP is not cost-effective. IMPLICATIONS FOR HEALTH CARE PROVISION AND POLICIES: Results indicated that PEP should not be implemented in the Dutch healthcare system. Furthermore, is seems highly unlikely that PEP could be cost-effective in other (comparable) European healthcare systems. IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH: The relatively positive economic results for CBT-enhanced PEP imply that UC enriched with CBT (but without PEP) might be cost-effective in preventing relapses in primary care patients with depression. The actual consequences of CBT for relapse prevention will have to be studied in further detail, both from a clinical and economic point of view.

Enhanced treatment for depression in primary care: long-term outcomes of a psycho-educational prevention program alone and enriched with psychiatric consultation or cognitive behavioral therapy.

BACKGROUND: The long-term outcome of major depression is often unfavorable, and because most cases of depression are managed by general practitioners (GPs), this places stress on the need to improve treatment in primary care. This study evaluated the long-term effects of enhancing the GP's usual care (UC) with three experimental interventions. METHOD: A randomized controlled trial was conducted from 1998 to 2003. The main inclusion criterion was receiving GP treatment for a depressive episode. We compared: (1) UC (n=72) with UC enhanced with: (2) a psycho-educational prevention (PEP) program (n=112); (3) psychiatrist-enhanced PEP (n=37); and (4) brief cognitive behavioral therapy followed by PEP (CBT-enhanced PEP) (n=44). We assessed depression status quarterly during a 3-year follow-up. RESULTS: Pooled across groups, depressive disorder-free and symptom-free times during follow-up were 83% and 17% respectively. Almost 64% of the patients had a relapse or recurrence, the median time to recurrence was 96 weeks, and the mean Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) score over 12 follow-up assessments was 9.6. Unexpectedly, PEP patients had no better outcomes than UC patients. However, psychiatrist-enhanced PEP and CBT-enhanced PEP patients reported lower BDI severity during follow-up than UC patients [mean difference 2.07 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13-3.00) and 1.62 (95% CI 0.70-2.55) respectively] and PEP patients [2.37 (95% CI 1.35-3.39) and 1.93 (95% CI 0.92-2.94) respectively]. CONCLUSIONS: The PEP program had no extra benefit compared to UC and may even worsen outcome in severely depressed patients. Enhancing treatment of depression in primary care with psychiatric consultation or brief CBT seems to improve the long-term outcome, but findings need replication as the interventions were combined with the ineffective PEP program.

Niacin skin flushing in schizophrenic and depressed patients and healthy controls.

This study compares the skin reactions to the niacin flushing test of 16 schizophrenic patients with those of 17 depressed patients and 16 healthy controls. Methyl nicotinate (niacin) in a concentration of 0.1 M was applied to the forearm for 5 min. Significant differences could be observed between the group of schizophrenic patients (less flushing) in comparison to the other groups. There were no statistical differences in niacin flushing between patients with depression and healthy controls. Gender, age and the use of antipsychotic agents did not appear to be confounders. The differences in flushing within the group of schizophrenic patients were striking, however. Most patients showed little or no flushing, but some patients reacted strongly. Although the three groups could be differentiated by the niacin flushing test, to develop a reliable clinical application of this test, further research is necessary.

A randomized open-label study of the impact of quetiapine versus risperidone on sexual functioning.

OBJECTIVE: To compare sexual functioning in patients treated with quetiapine or risperidone. METHODS: This open-label study included patients with schizophrenia or a related psychotic illness who were randomized to quetiapine (200-1200 mg/d) or risperidone (1-6 mg/d) for 6 weeks. Sexual dysfunction was assessed by a semistructured interview, the Antipsychotics and Sexual Functioning Questionnaire (ASFQ), based upon the Utvalg for Kliniske Undersogelser (UKU). RESULTS: Four of 25 quetiapine-treated patients (16%) and 12 of 24 risperidone-treated patients (50%) reported sexual dysfunction (chi 2 = 6.4; df = 1; P = 0.006) on the ASFQ. Six patients (11.7%; 4 on risperidone, 2 on quetiapine) spontaneously reported sexual dysfunction. The mean+/-SD dose was 580+/-224 mg/d for quetiapine and 3.2 +/- 1.3 mg/d for risperidone. Mean +/- SD prolactin levels in quetiapine- and risperidone-treated patients were 13.8 +/- 17.9 and 57.7 +/- 39.7 ng/mL, respectively. CONCLUSION: Sexual dysfunction was less common in patients treated with quetiapine than with risperidone. Direct questioning about sexual functioning is necessary to avoid underestimating the frequency of sexual side effects in patients with schizophrenia and related psychotic disorders.