Non-Pharmacological Interventions for Type 2 Diabetes in People Living with Severe Mental Illness: Results of a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: People with serious mental illnesses (SMIs) such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder die up to 30 years younger than individuals in the general population. Premature mortality among this population is often due to medical comorbidities, such as type 2 diabetes (T2D). Being a disease directly related to diet, adverse lifestyle choices, and side effects of psychotropic medication, an effective approach to T2D treatment and management could be non-pharmacological interventions. This systematic review and meta-analysis (1) summarise the current evidence base for non-pharmacological interventions (NPI) for diabetes management in people living with SMI and (2) evaluate the effect of these interventions on diverse health outcomes for people with SMI and comorbid diabetes. METHODS: Six databases were searched to identify relevant studies: PubMed (MEDLINE), PsycINFO, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, and Web of Science. Studies were included if they reported on non-pharmacological interventions targeted at the management of T2D in people living with SMI. To be eligible, studies had to further involve a control group or report multiple time points of data in the same study population. Whenever there were enough interventions reporting data on the same outcome, we also performed a meta-analysis. RESULTS: Of 1867 records identified, 14 studies were included in the systematic review and 6 were also eligible for meta-analysis. The results showed that there was a reduction, although not significant, in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) in the NPI group compared with the control, with a mean difference of -0.14 (95% CI, -0.42, 0.14, p = 0.33). Furthermore, NPI did not significantly reduce fasting blood glucose in these participants, with a mean difference of -17.70 (95% CI, -53.77, 18.37, p = 0.34). However, the meta-analysis showed a significant reduction in psychiatric symptoms: BPRS score, -3.66 (95% CI, -6.8, -0.47, p = 0.02) and MADRS score, -2.63 (95% CI, -5.24, -0.02, p = 0.05). NPI also showed a significant reduction in the level of total cholesterol compared with the control, with a mean difference of -26.10 (95% CI, -46.54, -5.66, p = 0.01), and in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol compared with control, with a standardised mean difference of -0.47 (95% CI, -0.90, -0.04, p = 0.03). NPI did not appear to have significant effect (p > 0.05) on body mass index (BMI), health-related quality of life (HRQL), triglycerides, and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol compared with control. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that NPI significantly (p < 0.05) reduced psychiatric symptoms, levels of total cholesterol, and LDL cholesterol in people with type 2 diabetes and SMI. While non-pharmacological interventions also reduced HbA1c, triglyceride, and BMI levels and improved quality of life in these people, the effects were not significant (p > 0.05).

Cost-Effectiveness of Non-pharmacological Interventions for Mild Cognitive Impairment and Dementia: A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations and a Review of Reviews.

BACKGROUND: Dementia prevalence is increasing, with no cure at present. Drug therapies have potential side effects and risk of mortality. People with dementia are frequently offered non-pharmacological interventions to improve quality of life and relieve symptoms. Identifying which interventions are cost-effective is important due to finite resources in healthcare services. AIMS: The aims were to review published economic evaluations of community and nursing home non-pharmacological interventions for people with mild cognitive impairment or dementia and assess the usefulness of these evaluations for decision making in health services, for use by policy and local and national decision makers. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42021252999) of economic evaluations of non-pharmacological interventions for dementia or mild cognitive impairment with a narrative approach to data synthesis. EXCLUSIONS: interventions for dementia prevention/early detection/end of life care. Databases searched: Academic Search Premier, MEDLINE, Web of Science, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycInfo, Psychology and Behavioural Sciences Collection, PsycArticles, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Business Source Premier and Regional Business News; timeframe 1 January 2011-11 May 2023. Reporting quality was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS). RESULTS: The review included 37 economic evaluations and four reviews worldwide across several distinct forms of care: physical activity, cognition, training, multicomponent, assistive technology and other (specialist dementia care, group living, home care vs care home). The intervention with the strongest evidence of cost-effectiveness was maintenance cognitive stimulation therapy. Case management, occupational therapy and dementia care management also showed good evidence of cost-effectiveness. CONCLUSION: More economic evidence on the cost-effectiveness of specific dementia care interventions is needed, with consistency of methods and outcome measures. This could improve local and national decision makers' confidence to promote future cost-effective dementia interventions.

Cost Analysis of a Digital Multimodal Cancer Prehabilitation.

INTRODUCTION: There is growing evidence that prehabilitation programmes effectively improve the physical and psychological conditions of cancer patients awaiting treatment. During the pandemic, people with cancer were classed as vulnerable. To reduce risk to this population Kent and Medway Prehabilitation service transformed into a TeleHealth format. The aim of this study is to assess the impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and the costs of a digital multimodal prehabilitation programme. METHODS: HRQoL was measured with the EQ-5D and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated. Costs of the prehabilitation service and inpatient care were calculated. Comparisons were made between different levels of prehabilitation received. RESULTS: A sample of 192 individuals was included in the study Mean HRQoL improved from 69.53 at baseline to 85.71 post-rehabilitation, a 23% increase. For each additional week of prehabilitation care in cancer patients, the model predicts that the total QALYS increase by 0.02, when baseline utility is held constant. CONCLUSIONS: Prehabilitation is associated with improved HRQoL and QALYs. Our model of a multimodal digital prehabilitation program can be beneficial for patients and reduce costs for healthcare facilities even when the patients attend only a few sessions.