A systematic review of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of peer education and peer support in prisons.

BACKGROUND: Prisoners experience significantly worse health than the general population. This review examines the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of peer interventions in prison settings. METHODS: A mixed methods systematic review of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness studies, including qualitative and quantitative synthesis was conducted. In addition to grey literature identified and searches of websites, nineteen electronic databases were searched from 1985 to 2012. Study selection criteria were: Population: Prisoners resident in adult prisons and children resident in Young Offender Institutions (YOIs). INTERVENTION: Peer-based interventions Comparators: Review questions 3 and 4 compared peer and professionally led approaches. OUTCOMES: Prisoner health or determinants of health; organisational/ process outcomes; views of prison populations. STUDY DESIGNS: Quantitative, qualitative and mixed method evaluations. RESULTS: Fifty-seven studies were included in the effectiveness review and one study in the cost-effectiveness review; most were of poor methodological quality. Evidence suggested that peer education interventions are effective at reducing risky behaviours, and that peer support services are acceptable within the prison environment and have a positive effect on recipients, practically or emotionally. Consistent evidence from many, predominantly qualitative, studies, suggested that being a peer deliverer was associated with positive effects. There was little evidence on cost-effectiveness of peer-based interventions. CONCLUSIONS: There is consistent evidence from a large number of studies that being a peer worker is associated with positive health; peer support services are also an acceptable source of help within the prison environment and can have a positive effect on recipients. Research into cost-effectiveness is sparse. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO ref: CRD42012002349

Disrupting the rhythm of depression: design and protocol of a randomized controlled trial on preventing relapse using brief cognitive therapy with or without antidepressants

Background: Maintenance treatment with antidepressants is the leading strategy to prevent relapse and recurrence in patients with recurrent major depressive disorder (MDD) who have responded to acute treatment with antidepressants (AD). However, in clinical practice most patients (up to 70-80%) are not willing to take this medication after remission or take too low dosages. Moreover, as patients need to take medication for several years, it may not be the most cost-effective strategy. The best established effective and available alternative is brief cognitive therapy (CT). However, it is unclear whether brief CT while tapering antidepressants (AD) is an effective alternative for long term use of AD in recurrent depression. In addition, it is unclear whether the combination of AD to brief CT is beneficial.Methods/design: Therefore, we will compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of brief CT while tapering AD to maintenance AD and the combination of CT with maintenance AD. In addition, we examine whether the prophylactic effect of CT was due to CT tackling illness related risk factors for recurrence such as residual symptoms or to its efficacy to modify presumed vulnerability factors of recurrence (e.g. rigid explicit and/or implicit dysfunctional attitudes). This is a multicenter RCT comparing the above treatment scenarios. Remitted patients on AD with at least two previous depressive episodes in the past five years (n = 276) will be recruited. The primary outcome is time related proportion of depression relapse/recurrence during minimal 15 months using DSM-IV-R criteria as assessed by the Structural Clinical Interview for Depression. Secondary outcome: economic evaluation (using a societal perspective) and number, duration and severity of relapses/recurrences.Discussion: This will be the first trial to investigate whether CT is effective in preventing relapse to depression in recurrent depression while tapering antidepressant treatment compared to antidepressant treatment alone and the combination of both. In addition, we explore explicit and implicit mediators of CT.Trial registration: Netherlands Trial Register (NTR): NTR1907

Preventing mood and anxiety disorders in youth: a multi-centre RCT in the high risk offspring of depressed and anxious patients

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Anxiety and mood disorders are highly prevalent and pose a huge burden on patients. Their offspring is at increased risk of developing these disorders as well, indicating a clear need for prevention of psychopathology in this group. Given high comorbidity and non-specificity of intergenerational transmission of disorders, prevention programs should target both anxiety and depression. Further, while the indication for preventive interventions is often elevated symptoms, offspring with other high risk profiles may also benefit from resilience-based prevention programs.</p> <p>Method/design</p> <p>The current STERK-study (Screening and Training: Enhancing Resilience in Kids) is a randomized controlled clinical trial combining selected and indicated prevention: it is targeted at both high risk individuals without symptoms and at those with subsyndromal symptoms. Individuals without symptoms meet two of three criteria of the High Risk Index (HRI; female gender, both parents affected, history of a parental suicide (attempt). This index was developed in an earlier study and corresponds with elevated risk in offspring of depressed patients. Children aged 8–17 years (n = 204) with subthreshold symptoms or meeting the criteria on the HRI are randomised to one of two treatment conditions, namely (a) 10 weekly individual child CBT sessions and 2 parent sessions or (b) minimal information. Assessments are held at pre-test, post-test and at 12 and 24 months follow-up. Primary outcome is the time to onset of a mood or anxiety disorder in the offspring. Secondary outcome measures include number of days with depression or anxiety, child and parent symptom levels, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness. Based on models of aetiology of mood and anxiety disorders as well as mechanisms of change during interventions, we selected potential mediators and moderators of treatment outcome, namely coping, parent–child interaction, self-associations, optimism/pessimism, temperament, and emotion processing.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The current intervention trial aims to significantly reduce the risk of intergenerational transmission of mood and anxiety disorders with a short and well targeted intervention that is directed at strengthening the resilience in potentially vulnerable children. We plan to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of such an intervention and to identify mechanisms of change.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>NTR2888</p

Cost-effectiveness analysis in severe mental illness: Outcome measures selection

Background: Most economic evaluations conducted in mental healthcare did not include widely recommended preference-based health outcomes like the QALY (Quality-Adjusted Life Years). Instead, studies have mainly been designed as cost-effectiveness analyses that include single outcome measures aimed at a (disease) specific aspect of health. Aims of the Study: To raise awareness about the potential problems related to the selection of outcome measures for economic studies in patient populations with severe mental illness. Furthermore, to make suggestions that may prevent these problems in future economic evaluations. Methods: Data of a previously conducted economic evaluation assessing the cost-effectiveness of the HIT (Hallucination focused Integrative Treatment) intervention in patients with schizophrenia were used for the analyses presented in the current paper. Economic analyses based on the results of the selected primary health outcome (Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale: PANSS) were compared with results based on various other health outcomes assessed during the study, including QALYs. Results: No relevant differences between groups were found on the single primary health outcome initially included in the cost-effectiveness analysis. In contrast, relevant and significant differences were identified on three of the four additionally assessed health outcomes. Conclusions based on the results of multiple cost-effectiveness analyses and acceptability curves were strongly in favour of the experimental intervention when including these three additional. instruments. QALY results did not show differences between groups. Discussion: Selecting between outcome measures for cost-effectiveness analysis in the field of mental healthcare appears to be a complicated process, which may have considerable consequences for the results of economic studies and subsequent policy decisions. It was argued that inconsistent results across the selected primary health outcome and additionally assessed health outcomes should explicitly be presented to decision-makers. Until there is consensus on a preference-based instrument suited for severe mental illness, QoL instruments could be applied instead of instruments aimed at specific aspects of health. Implications for Health Policies: Decision-makers in the field of mental healthcare should be careful when interpreting results of economic studies that included outcome measures aimed at a specific aspect of health. Such instruments may provide too narrow a view on relevant changes in health and findings may be difficult to generalise. Due to current reservations on the use of QALYs in mental healthcare, QALY outcomes should be considered in the context of the results of additionally assessed health outcomes

Cost-effectiveness of cognitive self-therapy in patients with depression and anxiety disorders

Objective: Self-therapy interventions could potentially reduce healthcare expenses and the need for care in the treatment of depression and anxiety disorders. This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of cognitive self-therapy (CST) in patients with these disorders. Method: A total of 151 patients were randomly assigned to CST or treatment as usual (TAU), and followed during 18 months. The Symptom Checklist 90 (SCL-90) was the primary outcome measure of the study. The reference year was 2003 (US$1.00 = e0.92). Results: Mean costs of patients in the CST group (US$4364) were lower than that of the patients who received TAU (US$5241). The results of the SCL-90 were slightly in favour of CST. Valuing an additional unit of health outcome at US$108 will lead to an 83% probability that CST is cost-effective. Conclusion: Cognitive self-therapy appears to be cost-effective. Wider implementation of CST may relieve the burden of many patients with emotional disorders whose treatment needs cannot be met in current healthcare systems

Economic consequences of alternative medication strategies in first episode non-affective psychosis

Background. - Maintenance treatment appears to be successful in preventing relapses in first episode psychosis, but is also associated with side effects. Guided discontinuation strategy is a less intrusive intervention, but may lead to more relapses. In the current economic evaluation, costs and health outcomes of discontinuation strategy will be compared with the results of maintenance treatment in patients with remitted first episode psychosis. Method. - The study was designed as a randomised clinical trial. In total 128 patients were prospectively followed for 18 months after six months of stable remission. The economic evaluation was conducted from a societal perspective. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were used as primary health outcome in the economic evaluation. Relapse rates were assessed in addition to various other secondary outcomes. Results. - There were no relevant differences in mean costs between groups during the study. Total costs were largely influenced by costs related to admissions to psychiatric hospitals. No differences between groups were found for QALY results. Conclusions. - There were no indications that either of the examined interventions is superior to the other in terms of costs or QALY results. Additional results indicated that the relapse rate in discontinuation strategy was twice as high, but without an increase in hospital admissions or negative consequences on other clinical outcomes. For a minority of remitted first episode patients, guided discontinuation strategy may offer a feasible alternative to maintenance treatment. 2007 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved