Assessing cost-effectiveness of drug interventions for schizophrenia

Objective: To assess from a health sector perspective the incremental cost-effectiveness of eight drug treatment scenarios for established schizophrenia. Method: Using a standardized methodology, costs and outcomes are modelled over the lifetime of prevalent cases of schizophrenia in Australia in 2000. A two-stage approach to assessment of health benefit is used. The first stage involves a quantitative analysis based on disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted, using best available evidence. The robustness of results is tested using probabilistic uncertainty analysis. The second stage involves application of 'second filter' criteria (equity, strength of evidence, feasibility and acceptability) to allow broader concepts of benefit to be considered. Results: Replacing oral typicals with risperidone or olanzapine has an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of A$48 000 and A$92 000/DALY respectively. Switching from low-dose typicals to risperidone has an ICER of A$80 000. Giving risperidone to people experiencing side-effects on typicals is more cost-effective at A$20 000. Giving clozapine to people taking typicals, with the worst course of the disorder and either little or clear deterioration, is cost-effective at A$42 000 or A$23 000/DALY respectively. The least cost-effective intervention is to replace risperidone with olanzapine at A$160 000/DALY. Conclusions: Based on an A$50 000/DALY threshold, low-dose typical neuroleptics are indicated as the treatment of choice for established schizophrenia, with risperidone being reserved for those experiencing moderate to severe side-effects on typicals. The more expensive olanzapine should only be prescribed when risperidone is not clinically indicated. The high cost of risperidone and olanzapine relative to modest health gains underlie this conclusion. Earlier introduction of clozapine however, would be cost-effective. This work is limited by weaknesses in trials (lack of long-term efficacy data, quality of life and consumer satisfaction evidence) and the translation of effect size into a DALY change. Some stakeholders, including SANE Australia, argue the modest health gains reported in the literature do not adequately reflect perceptions by patients, clinicians and carers, of improved quality of life with these atypicals.

A Comparison of Methodologies from Two Longitudinal Community-Based Randomized Controlled Trials of Similar Interventions in Palliative Care: What Worked and What Did Not

Background: Methodological challenges such as recruitment problems and participant burden make clinical trials in palliative care difficult. In 2001-2004, two community-based randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of case conferences in palliative care settings were independently conducted in Australia-the Queensland Case Conferences trial (QCC) and the Palliative Care Trial (PCT). Design: A structured comparative study of the QCC and PCT was conducted, organized by known practical and organizational barriers to clinical trials in palliative care. Results: Differences in funding dictated study designs and recruitment success; PCT had 6 times the budget of QCC. Sample size attainment. Only PCT achieved the sample size goal. QCC focused on reducing attrition through gatekeeping while PCT maximized participation through detailed recruitment strategies and planned for significant attrition. Testing sustainable interventions. QCC achieved a higher percentage of planned case conferences; the QCC strategy required minimal extra work for clinicians while PCT superimposed conferences on normal work schedules. Minimizing participant burden. Differing strategies of data collection were implemented to reduce participant burden. QCC had short survey instruments. PCT incorporated all data collection into normal clinical nursing encounters. Other. Both studies had acceptable withdrawal rates. Intention-to-treat analyses are planned. Both studies included substudies to validate new outcome measures. Conclusions: Health service interventions in palliative care can be studied using RCTs. Detailed comparative information of strategies, successes and challenges can inform the design of future trials. Key lessons include adequate funding, recruitment focus, sustainable interventions, and mechanisms to minimize participant burden.

A review of awareness interventions in brain injury rehabilitation

Unawareness related to brain injury has implications for participation in rehabilitation, functional outcomes, and the emotional well-being of clients. Addressing disorders of awareness is an integral component of many rehabilitation programmes, and a review of the literature identified a range of awareness interventions that include holistic milieu-oriented neuropsychological programmes, psychotherapy, compensatory and facilitatory approaches, structured experiences, direct feedback, videotaped feedback, confrontational techniques, cognitive therapy, group therapy, game formats and behavioural intervention. These approaches are examined in terms of their theoretical bases and research evidence. A distinction is made between intervention approaches for unawareness due to neurocognitive factors and approaches for unawareness due to psychological factors. The socio-cultural context of unawareness is a third factor presented in a biopsychosocial framework to guide clinical decisions about awareness interventions. The ethical and methodological concerns associated with research on awareness interventions are discussed. The main considerations relate to the embedded nature of awareness interventions within rehabilitation programmes, the need for individually tailored interventions, differing responses according to the nature of unawareness, and the risk of eliciting emotional distress in some clients.

Evidence-based approaches to dissemination and diffusion of physical activity interventions

With the increasing availability of effective, evidence-based physical activity interventions, widespread diffusion is needed. We examine conceptual foundations for research on dissemination and diffusion of physical activity interventions; describe two school-based program examples; review examples of dissemination and diffusion research on other health behaviors; and examine policies that may accelerate the diffusion process. Lack of dissemination and diffusion evaluation research and policy advocacy is one of the factors limiting the impact of evidence-based physical activity interventions on public health. There is the need to collaborate with policy experts from other fields to improve the interdisciplinary science base for dissemination and diffusion. The promise of widespread adoption of evidence-based physical activity interventions to improve public health is sufficient to justify devotion of substantial resources to the relevant research on dissemination and diffusion.