Search

Background: In Germany, evidence-based outpatient smoking cessation therapies are widely available. Long-term abstinence rates, however, are limited. Studies suggest that short-term residential therapy enables a higher level of environmental control, more intense contact and greater support among patients and from therapists, which could result in higher abstinence rates. The aim of the current START-study is to investigate the long-term efficacy of a short-term residential therapy exclusively for smoking cessation, conducted by a mobile team of expert therapists., Methods: A randomized controlled trial (RCT) is conducted to examine the efficacy of residential behavior therapeutic smoking cessation therapy compared to standard outpatient behavior therapeutic smoking cessation group therapy. Adult smokers consuming 10 or more cigarettes per day, who are willing to stop smoking, are randomized in a ratio of 1:1 between therapy groups. The primary endpoint is sustained abstinence for 6-month and 12-month periods. Secondary endpoints include smoking status after therapy, 7-day point abstinence after the 6-month and 12-month follow-ups, level of physical dependence, cost-effectiveness, use of nicotine replacement products, health-related quality of life, self-efficacy expectation for tobacco abstinence, motivational and volitional determinants of behavior change, self-reported depressive symptom severity, adverse events and possible side effects. Assessments will take place at baseline, post-therapy, and at 6-month and 12-month intervals after smoking cessation., Discussion: There is a high demand for long-term effective smoking cessation therapies. This study represents the first prospective RCT to examine the long-term efficacy of a residential smoking cessation therapy program compared to standard outpatient group therapy as an active control condition. The residential therapeutic concept may serve as a new model to substantially enhance future cessation therapies and improve the understanding of therapeutic impact factors on tobacco abstinence. Utilizing a mobile team, the model could be applied efficiently to medical centers that do not have permanent and trained personnel for smoking cessation at their disposal., Trial Registration: German Register for Clinical Trials (Deutsches Register für Klinische Studien), DRKS00013466. Retrospectively registered on 1 April 2019. https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=start.

Background: Depression has serious personal, family and economic consequences. It is estimated that it will cost £12.15 billion to the economy each year in England by 2026. Improving access to psychological therapies (IAPT) is the National Health Service talking therapies service in England for adults experiencing anxiety or depression. Over 1 million people are referred to IAPT every year, over half experiencing depression. Where symptoms of depression are mild to moderate, people are typically offered cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) self-help (CBT-SH) supported by a psychological well-being practitioner. The problem is that over half of people who complete treatment for depression in IAPT remain depressed despite receiving National Institute of Health and Care Excellent recommended treatment. Furthermore, less than half of IAPT service users complete treatment. This study seeks to investigate the effectiveness of an alternative to CBT-SH. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (MBCT) differs from CBT in focus, approach and practice, and may be more effective with a higher number of treatment completions., Methods/design: This is a definitive randomised controlled trial comparing supported MBCT self-help (MBCT-SH) with CBT-SH for adults experiencing mild to moderate depression being treated in IAPT services. We will recruit 410 participants experiencing mild to moderate depression from IAPT services and randomise these to receive either an MBCT-based self-help workbook or a CBT-based self-help workbook. Participants will be asked to complete their workbook within 16 weeks, with six support sessions with a psychological well-being practitioner. The primary outcome is depression symptom severity on treatment completion. Secondary outcomes are treatment completion rates and measures of generalized anxiety, well-being, functioning and mindfulness. An exploratory non-inferiority analysis will be conducted in the event the primary hypothesis is not supported. A semi-structured interview with participants will guide understanding of change processes., Discussion: If the findings from this randomised controlled trial demonstrate that MBCT-SH is more effective than CBT-SH for adults experiencing depression, this will provide evidence for policy makers and lead to changes to clinical practice in IAPT services, leading to greater choice of self-help treatment options and better outcomes for service users. If the exploratory non-inferiority analysis is conducted and this indicates non-inferiority of MBCT-SH in comparison to CBT-SH this will also be of interest to policy makers when seeking to increase service user choice of self-help treatment options for depression., Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trial registration number: ISRCTN 13495752. Registered on 31 August 2017 (www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN13495752).

Background: A randomised controlled trial found that a structured mindfulness group therapy (MGT) programme was as effective as treatment as usual (mostly cognitive-behavioural therapy) for patients with a diagnosis of depression, anxiety or stress and adjustment disorders in Sweden (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01476371)., Aims: To perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of MGT compared with treatment as usual from both a healthcare and a societal perspective for the trial duration (8 weeks)., Method: The costs from a healthcare perspective included treatment as usual, medication and costs for providing MGT. The societal perspective included costs from the healthcare perspective plus savings from productivity gains for the trial duration. The effectiveness was measured as quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) using the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire and the UK value set. Uncertainty surrounding the incremental costs and effects were estimated using non-parametric bootstrapping with 5000 replications and presented with 95% confidence intervals and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves., Results: The MGT group had significantly lower healthcare and societal costs (mean differences -€115 (95% CI -193 to -36) and -€112 (95% CI -207 to -17), respectively) compared with the control group. In terms of effectiveness, there was no significant difference in QALY gain (mean difference -0.003, 95% CI -0.0076 to 0.0012) between the two groups., Conclusions: MGT is a cost-saving alternative to treatment as usual over the trial duration from both a healthcare and a societal perspective for patients with a diagnosis of depression, anxiety or stress and adjustment disorders in Sweden.

Background: WHO recommends the use of psychological interventions as first-line treatment for depression in low-income and middle-income countries. However, evaluations of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of such interventions among people with HIV are scarce. Our aim was to establish the effectiveness of group support psychotherapy (GSP) delivered by lay health workers for depression treatment among people living with HIV in a rural area of Uganda on a large scale., Methods: In this cluster-randomised trial, we included 30 health centres offering HIV care. These were randomly assigned to deliver either GSP or group HIV education (GHE). Randomisation, in a ratio of 1:1, was achieved by health centre managers separately picking a paper containing the intervention allocation from a basket. Participants were people living with HIV, aged 19 years and older, with mild to moderate major depression assessed with the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview depression module, taking antiretroviral therapy, and antidepressant-naive. Group sessions were led by trained lay health workers once a week for 8 weeks. The primary outcomes were the proportion of participants with major depression and function scores at 6 months post-treatment, analysed by intention to treat by means of multilevel random effect regression analyses adjusting for clustering in health centres. This trial is registered with the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry, PACTR201608001738234., Findings: Between Sept 13 and Dec 15, 2016, we assessed 1473 individuals, of whom 1140 were recruited from health centres offering GSP (n=578 [51%]) or GHE (n=562 [49%]). Two (<1%) participants in the GSP group were diagnosed with major depression 6 months post-treatment compared with 160 (28%) in the GHE group (adjusted odds ratio=0·01, 95% CI 0·003-0·012, p<0·0001). The mean function scores 6 months post-treatment were 9·85 (SD 0·76) in the GSP group and 6·83 (2·85) in the GHE group (β=4·12; 95% CI 3·75-4·49, p<0·0001). 36 individuals had 63 serious adverse events, which included 25 suicide attempts and 22 hospital admissions for medical complications. The outcomes of these serious adverse events included 16 deaths, 4 of which were completed suicides (GSP=2; GHE=2), and 12 of which were HIV-related medical complications (GSP=8; GHE=4). Cost-effectiveness estimates showed an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of US$13·0 per disability-adjusted life-year averted, which can be considered very cost-effective in Uganda., Interpretation: Integration of cost-effective psychological treatments such as group support psychotherapy into existing HIV interventions might improve the mental health of people living with HIV., Funding: MQ Transforming Mental Health and Grand Challenges Canada., (Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: Several types of psychotherapy have been proven successful in the treatment of personality disorders in younger age groups, however studies among older patients are lacking. We developed a group schema-focused therapy (SFT) enriched with psychomotor therapy (PMT) for older adults with cluster B and/or C personality disorders. This paper describes the design of a randomized controlled trial (RCT). We will evaluate the (cost-)effectiveness of this therapy protocol in specialized mental health care. We hypothesize that our treatment program is cost-effective and superior to treatment as usual (TAU) in reducing psychological distress and improving quality of life in older adults treated to specialized mental healthcare., Methods: A multicenter RCT with a one-year follow-up comparing group schema-focused therapy enriched with psychomotor therapy (group SFT + PMT) and TAU for adults aged 60 years and older who suffer from either a cluster B and/or C personality disorder. The primary outcome is general psychological distress measured with the 53-item Brief Symptom Inventory. Secondary outcomes are the Schema Mode Inventory (118-item version) and the Young Schema Questionnaire. Cost-effectiveness analysis will be performed from a societal perspective with the EuroQol five dimensions questionnaire and structured cost-interviews., Discussion: This study will add to the knowledge of psychotherapy in later life. The study specifically contributes to the evidence on (cost-) effectiveness of group SFT enriched with PMT adapted to the needs of for older adults with cluster b and/or c personality., Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register NTR 6621 . Registered on 20 August 2017.

Background: In primary and secondary care medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) or functional somatic syndromes (FSS) constitute a major burden for patients and society with high healthcare costs and societal costs. Objectives were to provide an overview of the evidence regarding the cost-effectiveness of interventions for MUS or FSS, and to assess the quality of these studies., Methods: We searched the databases PubMed, PsycINFO, the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS-EED) and the CEA registry to conduct a systematic review. Articles with full economic evaluations on interventions focusing on adult patients with undifferentiated MUS or fibromyalgia (FM), irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS), with no restrictions on comparators, published until 15 June 2018, were included. We excluded preventive interventions. Two reviewers independently extracted study characteristics and cost-effectiveness data and used the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria Checklist to appraise the methodological quality., Results: A total of 39 studies out of 1,613 articles met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-two studies reported costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained and cost-utility analyses (CUAs). In 13 CUAs the intervention conditions dominated the control conditions or had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio below the willingness-to-pay threshold of € 50,000 per QALY, meaning that the interventions were (on average) cost-effective in comparison with the control condition. Group interventions focusing on MUS (n = 3) or FM (n = 4) might be more cost-effective than individual interventions. The included studies were heterogeneous with regard to the included patients, interventions, study design, and outcomes., Conclusion: This review provides an overview of 39 included studies of interventions for patients with MUS and FSS and the methodological quality of these studies. Considering the limited comparability due to the heterogeneity of the studies, group interventions might be more cost-effective than individual interventions., Registration: Study methods were documented in an international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) protocol, registration number: CRD42017060424., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: Anxiety and depression are prevalent among cardiac rehabilitation patients but pharmacological and psychological treatments have limited effectiveness in this group. Furthermore, psychological interventions have not been systematically integrated into cardiac rehabilitation services despite being a strategic priority for the UK National Health Service. A promising new treatment, metacognitive therapy, may be well-suited to the needs of cardiac rehabilitation patients and has the potential to improve outcomes. It is based on the metacognitive model, which proposes that a thinking style dominated by rumination, worry and threat monitoring maintains emotional distress. Metacognitive therapy is highly effective at reducing this thinking style and alleviating anxiety and depression in mental health settings. This trial aims to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of group-based metacognitive therapy for cardiac rehabilitation patients with elevated anxiety and/or depressive symptoms., Methods/design: The PATHWAY Group-MCT trial is a multicentre, two-arm, single-blind, randomised controlled trial comparing the clinical- and cost-effectiveness of group-based metacognitive therapy plus usual cardiac rehabilitation to usual cardiac rehabilitation alone. Cardiac rehabilitation patients (target sample n = 332) with elevated anxiety and/or depressive symptoms will be recruited across five UK National Health Service Trusts. Participants randomised to the intervention arm will receive six weekly sessions of group-based metacognitive therapy delivered by either cardiac rehabilitation professionals or research nurses. The intervention and control groups will both be offered the usual cardiac rehabilitation programme within their Trust. The primary outcome is severity of anxiety and depressive symptoms at 4-month follow-up measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale total score. Secondary outcomes are severity of anxiety/depression at 12-month follow-up, health-related quality of life, severity of post-traumatic stress symptoms and strength of metacognitive beliefs at 4- and 12-month follow-up. Qualitative interviews will help to develop an account of barriers and enablers to the effectiveness of the intervention., Discussion: This trial will evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of group-based metacognitive therapy in alleviating anxiety and depression in cardiac rehabilitation patients. The therapy, if effective, offers the potential to improve psychological wellbeing and quality of life in this large group of patients., Trial Registration: UK Clinical Trials Gateway, ISRCTN74643496 , Registered on 8 April 2015.

Clinical Emotional Freedom Techniques (EFT) is an evidence-based treatment for depression and anxiety. The current study sought to elucidate the relationship between posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, and anxiety in a nonclinical population. The sample (N = 81) comprised participants at five 2-day EFT workshops. All groups used an EFT protocol called Borrowing Benefits, in which the group facilitator works with a single client while other participants self-apply EFT. Participants were assessed on 9 specific conditions as well as on the breadth (Positive Symptom Total [PST]) and depth (General Symptom Index [GSI]) of psychological distress. Physical pain and addictive cravings were also assessed. Significant reductions were observed in all measures (P < .03). Associations between PST, GSI, and PTSD were significant (P < .026). Participants maintained all gains at 6-month follow-up (P < .02) with the exception of the Hostility subscale, while Cohen's d = 0.54 indicated a moderate treatment effect for PTSD. The relationship between psychological and physiological conditions identified in this study is consistent with that found in other studies. Group treatment is cost-effective and efficient, and the efficacy of EFT in groups indicates the utility of the Borrowing Benefits technique.

The aim of this study was to analyze the cost utility of a group-based form of acceptance and commitment therapy (GACT) in patients with fibromyalgia (FM) compared with patients receiving recommended pharmacological treatment (RPT) or on a waiting list (WL). The data were derived from a previously published study, a randomized controlled trial that focused on clinical outcomes. Health economic outcomes included health-related quality of life and health care use at baseline and at 6-month follow-up using the EuroQoL and the Client Service Receipt Inventory, respectively. Analyses included quality-adjusted life years, direct and indirect cost differences, and incremental cost effectiveness ratios. A total of 156 FM patients were randomized (51 GACT, 52 RPT, 53 WL). GACT was related to significantly less direct costs over the 6-month study period compared with both control arms (GACT €824.2 ± 1,062.7 vs RPT €1,730.7 ± 1,656.8 vs WL €2,462.7 ± 2,822.0). Lower direct costs for GACT compared with RPT were due to lower costs from primary care visits and FM-related medications. The incremental cost effectiveness ratios were dominant in the completers' analysis and remained robust in the sensitivity analyses. In conclusion, acceptance and commitment therapy appears to be a cost-effective treatment compared with RPT in patients with FM., Perspective: Decision-makers have to prioritize their budget on the treatment option that is the most cost effective for the management of a specific patient group. From government as well as health care perspectives, this study shows that a GACT is more cost effective than pharmacological treatment in management of FM., (Copyright © 2017 American Pain Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The impact of humanitarian disasters upon mental health is well recognised. The evidence for psychological interventions for mental health is mounting, but few interventions have been rigorously tested in humanitarian settings. To be sustainable in humanitarian settings interventions need to be short, simple, deliverable by nonspecialists under supervision, and adopt a transdiagnostic approach where an array of mental health outcomes are addressed simultaneously. These elements have been incorporated into the newly developed WHO Problem Management Plus (PM+) Group intervention. The aim of this trial is to evaluate the locally adapted PM+ Group intervention for women in Swat, Pakistan., Methods: This PM+ Group trial is a two-arm, single-blind, cluster randomised controlled trial conducted in a community-based setting with women in rural Pakistan. PM+ is delivered in partnership with the Lady Health Worker (LHW) Programme which provides community-based health care to women in Pakistan. Thirty-four LHW clusters will be randomised in a 1:1 allocation ratio using a permuted-block randomisation method. Participants screened and found to meet the inclusion criteria will be allocated to either the PM+ intervention group (n = 306), or the control arm (n = 306). The manualised PM+ intervention involves five sessions, each lasting 3 h, and introduces four strategies applied by participants to problems that they are facing. It is delivered by local female facilitators with a minimum of 16 years of education who are provided with targeted training and supervision. The primary outcome is individual psychological distress, measured by levels of anxiety and depression on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale at 20 weeks after baseline. Secondary outcomes include major depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, levels of social support, levels of functioning, and economic effectiveness. Intervention acceptability will be explored through an embedded qualitative study., Discussion: The PM+ Group trial will provide important evidence on the effectiveness of an empirically supported psychological treatment delivered by nonspecialists in a humanitarian setting. If proven effective, the qualitative component will inform strategies for PM+ Group scale-up in health systems in other humanitarian settings., Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, identifier: ACTRN12616000037404. Registered on 19 January 2016; WHO Protocol ID RPC705, v.4, 2 November 2015.

Background: One billion children live in war-affected regions of the world. We conducted the first cost-effectiveness analysis of an intervention for war-affected youth in sub-Saharan Africa, as well as a broader cost analysis., Methods: The Youth Readiness Intervention (YRI) is a behavioural treatment for reducing functional impairment associated with psychological distress among war-affected young persons. A randomized controlled trial was conducted in Freetown, Sierra Leone, from July 2012 to July 2013. Participants (n = 436, aged 15-24) were randomized to YRI (n = 222) or care as usual (n = 214). Functional impairment was indexed by the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Scale; scores were converted to quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). An 'ingredients approach' estimated financial and economic costs, assuming a societal perspective. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were also expressed in terms of gains across dimensions of mental health and schooling. Secondary analyses explored whether intervention effects were largest among those worst-off (upper quartile) at baseline., Results: Retention at 6-month follow-up was 85% (n = 371). The estimated economic cost of the intervention was $104 per participant. Functional impairment was lower among YRI recipients, compared with controls, following the intervention but not at 6-month follow-up, and yielded an ICER of $7260 per QALY gained. At 8-month follow-up, teachers' interviews indicated that YRI recipients observed higher school enrolment [P < 0.001, odds ratio (OR) 8.9], denoting a cost of $431 per additional school year gained, as well as better school attendance (P = 0.007, OR 34.9) and performance (P = 0.03, effect size = -1.31). Secondary analyses indicated that the intervention was cost-effective among those worst-off at baseline, yielding an ICER of $3564 per QALY gained., Conclusions: The YRI is not cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of three times average gross domestic product per capita. However, results indicate that the YRI translated into a range of benefits, such as improved school enrolment, not captured by cost-effectiveness analysis. We also outline areas for modification to improve cost-effectiveness in future trials., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: RPCGA-YRI-21003., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: The negative symptoms of schizophrenia significantly impact on quality of life and social functioning, and current treatment options are limited. In this study the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of group body psychotherapy as a treatment for negative symptoms were compared with an active control., Design: A parallel-arm, multisite randomised controlled trial. Randomisation was conducted independently of the research team, using a 1 : 1 computer-generated sequence. Assessors and statisticians were blinded to treatment allocation. Analysis was conducted following the intention-to-treat principle. In the cost-effectiveness analysis, a health and social care perspective was adopted., Eligibility Criteria: age 18-65 years; diagnosis of schizophrenia with symptoms present at > 6 months; score of ≥ 18 on Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) negative symptoms subscale; no change in medication type in past 6 weeks; willingness to participate; ability to give informed consent; and community outpatient., Exclusion Criteria: inability to participate in the groups and insufficient command of English., Settings: Participants were recruited from NHS mental health community services in five different Trusts. All groups took place in local community spaces., Interventions: Control intervention: a 10-week, 90-minute, 20-session group beginners' Pilates class, run by a qualified Pilates instructor. Treatment intervention: a 10-week, 90-minute, 20-session manualised group body psychotherapy group, run by a qualified dance movement psychotherapist., Outcomes: The primary outcome was the PANSS negative symptoms subscale score at end of treatment. Secondary outcomes included measures of psychopathology, functional, social, service use and treatment satisfaction outcomes, both at treatment end and at 6-month follow-up., Results: A total of 275 participants were randomised (140 body psychotherapy group, 135 Pilates group). At the end of treatment, 264 participants were assessed (137 body psychotherapy group, 127 Pilates group). The adjusted difference in means of the PANSS negative subscale at the end of treatment was 0.03 [95% confidence interval (CI) -1.11 to 1.17], showing no advantage of the intervention. In the secondary outcomes, the mean difference in the Clinical Assessment Interview for negative symptoms expression subscale at the end of treatment was 0.62 (95% CI -1.23 to 0.00), and in extrapyramidal movement disorder symptoms -0.65 (95% CI -1.13 to -0.16) at the end of treatment and -0.58 (95% CI -1.07 to -0.09) at 6 months' follow-up, showing a small significant advantage of body psychotherapy. No serious adverse events related to the interventions were reported. The total costs of the intervention were comparable with the control, with no clear evidence of cost-effectiveness for either condition., Limitations: Owing to the absence of a treatment-as-usual arm, it is difficult to determine whether or not both arms are an improvement over routine care., Conclusions: In comparison with an active control, group body psychotherapy does not have a clinically relevant beneficial effect in the treatment of patients with negative symptoms of schizophrenia. These findings conflict with the review that led to the current National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines suggesting that arts therapies may be an effective treatment for negative symptoms., Future Work: Determining whether or not this lack of effectiveness extends to all types of art therapies would be informative., Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN842165587., Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 11. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Background: People with multiple sclerosis have problems with memory and attention. Cognitive rehabilitation is a structured set of therapeutic activities designed to retrain an individual's memory and other cognitive functions. Cognitive rehabilitation may be provided to teach people strategies to cope with these problems, in order to reduce the impact on everyday life. The effectiveness of cognitive rehabilitation for people with multiple sclerosis has not been established., Methods: This is a multi-centre, randomised controlled trial investigating the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a group-based cognitive rehabilitation programme for attention and memory problems for people with multiple sclerosis. Four hundred people with multiple sclerosis will be randomised from at least four centres. Participants will be eligible if they have memory problems, are 18 to 69 years of age, are able to travel to attend group sessions and give informed consent. Participants will be randomised in a ratio of 6:5 to the group rehabilitation intervention plus usual care or usual care alone. Intervention groups will receive 10 weekly sessions of a manualised cognitive rehabilitation programme. The intervention will include both restitution strategies to retrain impaired attention and memory functions and compensation strategies to enable participants to cope with their cognitive problems. All participants will receive a follow-up questionnaire and an assessment by a research assistant at 6 and 12 months after randomisation. The primary outcome is the Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS) Psychological subscale at 12 months. Secondary outcomes include the Everyday Memory Questionnaire, General Health Questionnaire-30, EQ-5D and a service use questionnaire from participants, and the Everyday Memory Questionnaire-relative version and Carer Strain Index from a relative or friend. The primary analysis will be based on intention to treat. A mixed-model regression analysis of the MSIS Psychological subscale at 12 months will be used to estimate the effect of the group cognitive rehabilitation programme., Discussion: The study will provide evidence regarding the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a group-based cognitive rehabilitation programme for attention and memory problems in people with multiple sclerosis., Trial Registration: ISRCTN09697576 . Registered 14 August 2014.

Background: Problematic hypoglycaemia is a significant problem among people with insulin-treated type 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus, which adversely affects quality of life and leads to high societal costs. Blood glucose awareness training (BGAT) is a psycho-educational group intervention that has shown to be effective but difficult to implement in clinical practice, due to its demanding nature. The aim of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the HypoAware intervention that has its roots in BGAT and helps patients to effectively recognize, treat and prevent hypoglycaemia, while also focussing on the psychosocial consequences of living with the constant risk of hypoglycaemia, both for patients and their significant others., Methods/design: An economic evaluation will be conducted alongside a cluster-randomised controlled trial in eight hospitals in the Netherlands. We aim to include 154 participants who will either receive HypoAware or care as usual. HypoAware consists of three group sessions and is combined with two online modules. The primary clinical outcome is severe hypoglycaemia. Secondary outcomes include mild hypoglycaemia, hypoglycaemia awareness, fear of hypoglycaemia, diabetes distress, anxiety and depression, health-related quality of life, diabetes-specific self-efficacy and HbA1c. Utilities will be measured using the EQ-5D-5 L questionnaire. Costs will be measured from a societal perspective and include health care utilization, medication and lost productivity costs. Measurements will be performed at baseline, 2, 4, and 6 months to compare both groups, and an additional 12 months for the intervention group only. Process outcomes will be gathered after every group meeting via telephone/email contact with health care professionals and via the online environment., Discussion: HypoAware is expected to significantly reduce episodes of severe hypoglycaemia, with subsequent beneficial effects on psychosocial outcomes and health care costs. When proven cost-effective, HypoAware will be incorporated in the clinical guidelines of Dutch diabetes care., Trial Registration: Dutch Trial Register NTR4538.

Background: The majority of mental health problems are non-psychotic (e.g., depression, anxiety, and phobias). For some people, art therapy may be a more acceptable alternative form of psychological therapy than standard forms of treatment, such as talking therapies. This study was part of a health technology assessment commissioned by the National Institute for Health Research, UK and aimed to systematically appraise the clinical and cost-effective evidence for art therapy for people with non-psychotic mental health disorders., Methods: Comprehensive literature searches for studies examining art therapy in populations with non-psychotic mental health disorders were performed in May 2013. A quantitative systematic review of clinical effectiveness and a systematic review of studies evaluating the cost-effectiveness of group art therapy were conducted., Results: Eleven randomised controlled trials were included (533 patients). Meta-analysis was not possible due to clinical heterogeneity and insufficient comparable data on outcome measures across studies. The control groups varied between studies but included: no treatment/wait-list, attention placebo controls and psychological therapy comparators. Art therapy was associated with significant positive changes relative to the control group in mental health symptoms in 7 of the 11 studies. A de novo model was constructed and populated with data identified from the clinical review. Scenario analyses were conducted allowing comparisons of group art therapy with wait-list control and group art therapy with group verbal therapy. Group art-therapy appeared cost-effective compared with wait-list control with high certainty although generalisability to the target population was unclear; group verbal therapy appeared more cost-effective than art therapy but there was considerable uncertainty and a sizeable probability that art therapy was more cost effective., Conclusions: From the limited available evidence art therapy was associated with positive effects compared with control in a number of studies in patients with different clinical profiles. The included trials were generally of poor quality and are therefore likely to be at high risk of bias. Art therapy appeared to be cost-effective versus wait-list but further studies are needed to confirm this finding in the target population. There was insufficient evidence to make an informed comparison of the cost-effectiveness of group art therapy with group verbal therapy., Trial Registration: HTA project no. 12/27/16; PROSPERO registration no. CRD42013003957.

Objective: The aim of the study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a cognitive-behavioral group training compared with a wait-list control for patients with unexplained physical symptoms (UPS)., Methods: A probabilistic decision-analytic Markov model was developed with three health states (poor health, average health, and death) based on a cutoff score of the Physical Component Summary of the short-form 36 health survey. To assess the cost-effectiveness in terms of cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), a societal perspective was adopted. The model consisted of cycles of 3 months and a time horizon of 4 years. Data for the model were derived from a randomized controlled trial, in which 162 patients with UPS were randomized either to cognitive-behavioral group training or to the wait-list control. Data were assessed at baseline and after the training of 3 months or after a wait-list period of 3 months. In addition, the training group was followed in an uncontrolled phase and assessed at 3 months and 1 year after the training., Results: After 4 years, the group training was in terms of cost-effectiveness "dominant" compared with the wait-list control; there was a positive effect of 0.06 QALYs and a €828 reduction in costs. The cost-effectiveness improved with a longer time horizon. A threshold of €30,000/QALY was passed after 18 months. The group training was cost saving after 33 months., Conclusions: Cognitive-behavioral group training is a cost-effective treatment compared with the wait-list control for patients with UPS., (Copyright © 2015 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Chronic fatigue is present in more than 60% of the patients with a neuromuscular disease and can be their most disabling symptom. In combination with other impairments, fatigue often results in low levels of physical activity and decreased social participation, leading to high societal costs. 'Energetic' is a self-management group program aimed at improving social participation, physical endurance and alleviating fatigue in these patients. The primary aim of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the Energetic program., Methods/design: A multicentered, assessor-blinded, two-armed randomized controlled trial is conducted with evaluations at inclusion and four, seven and fifteen months later. The study includes patients with a neuromuscular disease and chronic fatigue and, when present, their caregivers. The participants are randomized (ratio 1:1) to either an intervention group, receiving the Energetic program, or a control group, receiving usual care (i.e., no specific intervention). The Energetic program covers four months and includes four modules: 1) individually tailored aerobic exercise training; 2) education about aerobic exercise; 3) self-management training in applying energy conservation strategies; and 4) implementation and relapse prevention in daily life. Two months after cessation of the program a booster session is provided. The primary outcome is the perceived performance score of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM). Secondary outcomes include the COPM-satisfaction score, and measures of fatigue, physical endurance, activity engagement, mood, and self-efficacy. Caregiver burden is also evaluated as a secondary outcome. Health-related quality of life and medical and societal costs are assessed to estimate cost-effectiveness of the program., Discussion: The Energetic study is the first randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a combined physical and self-management group training program for improving social participation, physical endurance and alleviating fatigue in patients with neuromuscular diseases. It will generate new insights in (cost-)effective rehabilitation strategies for these incurable conditions., Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02208687 .

Background: Impairments of memory are commonly reported by people with traumatic brain injuries (TBI). Such deficits are persistent, debilitating, and can severely impact quality of life. Currently, many do not routinely receive follow-up appointments for residual memory problems following discharge., Methods/design: This is a multi-centre, randomised controlled trial investigating the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a group-based memory rehabilitation programme. Three hundred and twelve people with a traumatic brain injury will be randomised from four centres. Participants will be eligible if they had a traumatic brain injury more than 3 months prior to recruitment, have memory problems, are 18 to 69 years of age, are able to travel to one of our centres and attend group sessions, and are able to give informed consent. Participants will be randomised in clusters of 4 to 6 to the group rehabilitation intervention or to usual care. Intervention groups will receive 10 weekly sessions of a manualised memory rehabilitation programme, which has been developed in previous pilot studies. The intervention will include restitution strategies to retrain impaired memory functions and compensation strategies to enable participants to cope with their memory problems. All participants will receive a follow-up postal questionnaire and an assessment by a research assistant at 6 and 12 months post-randomisation. The primary outcome is the Everyday Memory Questionnaire at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include the Rivermead Behavioural Memory Test-3, General Health Questionnaire-30, health related quality of life, cost-effectiveness analysis determined by the EQ-5D and a service use questionnaire, individual goal attainment, European Brain Injury Questionnaire (patient and relative versions), and the Everyday Memory Questionnaire-relative version. The primary analysis will be based on intention to treat. A mixed-model regression analysis of the Everyday Memory Questionnaire at 6 months will be used to estimate the effect of the group memory rehabilitation programme., Discussion: The study will hopefully provide robust evidence regarding the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a group-based memory rehabilitation intervention for civilians and military personnel following TBI. We discuss our decision-making regarding choice of outcome measures and control group, and the unique challenges to recruiting people with memory problems to trials., Trial Registration: ISRCTN65792154; Date: 18 October 2012.

Background: Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a severe and highly prevalent mental disorder. Schema therapy (ST) has been found effective in the treatment of BPD and is commonly delivered through an individual format. A group format (group schema therapy, GST) has also been developed. GST has been found to speed up and amplify the treatment effects found for individual ST. Delivery in a group format may lead to improved cost-effectiveness. An important question is how GST compares to treatment as usual (TAU) and what format for delivery of schema therapy (format A; intensive group therapy only, or format B; a combination of group and individual therapy) produces the best outcomes., Methods/design: An international, multicentre randomized controlled trial (RCT) will be conducted with a minimum of fourteen participating centres. Each centre will recruit multiple cohorts of at least sixteen patients. GST formats as well as the orders in which they are delivered to successive cohorts will be balanced. Within countries that contribute an uneven number of sites, the orders of GST formats will be balanced within a difference of one. The RCT is designed to include a minimum of 448 patients with BPD. The primary clinical outcome measure will be BPD severity. Secondary clinical outcome measures will include measures of BPD and general psychiatric symptoms, schemas and schema modes, social functioning and quality of life. Furthermore, an economic evaluation that consists of cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses will be performed using a societal perspective. Lastly, additional investigations will be carried out that include an assessment of the integrity of GST, a qualitative study on patients' and therapists' experiences with GST, and studies on variables that might influence the effectiveness of GST., Discussion: This trial will compare GST to TAU for patients with BPD as well as two different formats for the delivery of GST. By combining an evaluation of clinical effectiveness, an economic evaluation and additional investigations, it will contribute to an evidence-based understanding of which treatment should be offered to patients with BPD from clinical, economic, and stakeholders' perspectives., Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register NTR2392. Registered 25 June 2010.

Background: Meaning-focused coping may be at the core of adequate adjustment to life after cancer. Cancer survivors who experience their life as meaningful are better adjusted, have better quality of life and psychological functioning. Meaning-Centered Group Psychotherapy for Cancer Survivors (MCGP-CS) was designed to help patients to sustain or enhance a sense of meaning and purpose in their lives. The aim of the proposed study is to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of MCGP-CS., Methods/design: Survivors diagnosed with cancer in the last 5 years and treated with curative intent, are recruited via several hospitals in the Netherlands. After screening, 168 survivors are randomly assigned to one of the three study arms: 1. Meaning-Centered Group Psychotherapy (MCGP-CS) 2. Supportive group psychotherapy (SGP) 3. Care as usual (CAU). Baseline assessment takes place before randomisation, with follow up assessments post-intervention and at 3, 6 and 12 months follow-up. Primary outcome is meaning making (PMP, PTGI, SPWB). Secondary outcome measures address quality of life (EORTC-30), anxiety and depression (HADS), hopelessness (BHS), optimism (LOT-R), adjustment to cancer (MAC), and costs (TIC-P, EQ-5D, PRODISQ)., Discussion: Meaning-focused coping is key to adjustment to life after cancer, however, there is a lack of evidence based psychological interventions in this area. Many cancer survivors experience feelings of loneliness and alienation, and have a need for peer support, therefore a group method in particular, can be beneficial for sustaining or enhancing a sense of meaning. If this MCGP-CS is effective for cancer survivors, it can be implemented in the practice of psycho-oncology care., Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register, NTR3571.

Background: Chronic fatigue syndrome or myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) is a relatively common and potentially serious condition with a limited evidence base for treatment. Specialist treatment for paediatric CFS/ME uses interventions recommended by National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) including cognitive behavioural therapy, graded exercise therapy and activity management. The Lightning Process (LP) is a trademarked intervention derived from osteopathy, life-coaching and neuro-linguistic programming, delivered over three consecutive days as group sessions. Although over 250 children with CFS/ME attend LP courses each year, there are no reported studies on the effectiveness or cost-effectiveness., Methods: This pragmatic randomised controlled trial is set within a specialist paediatric CFS/ME service in the south west of England. Children and young people with CFS/ME (n = 80 to 112), aged 12 to 18 years old will be randomised to specialist medical care (SMC) or SMC plus the LP. The primary outcome will be physical function (SF-36 physical function short form) and fatigue (Chalder Fatigue Scale)., Discussion: This study will tell us whether adding the LP to SMC is effective and cost-effective compared to SMC alone. This study will also provide detailed information on the implementation of the LP and SMC., Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN81456207 (31 July 2012).

Summary of Background Data: The incidence of chronic pain is higher among immigrants in Europe than among the native European population. Therapeutic interventions in this population are far less effective than in patients for whom these programmes were originally developed., Objectives: In a randomised trial, we investigated whether a cognitive behavioural treatment (CBT) programme supplemented with culturally sensitive aspects (CsCBT) improves pain intensity, pain disability and quality of life among immigrant patients, compared with a treatment of culturally sensitive exercise therapy (CsET) alone. Furthermore, we investigated whether healthcare costs would decrease., Methods: First-generation Turkish immigrants residing in Switzerland (20-65 years of age) who suffered from chronic pain were enrolled in the trial. Patients were randomised to attend either CsCBT or CsET. The CsCBT intervention was based upon a manualised cognitive-behavioural group treatment programme for chronic pain patients and adapted to the needs of a Turkish immigrant population. The CsET intervention was based on principles of exercise therapy for treatment of nonspecific low back pain., Results: A total of 116 outpatients were recruited between October 2004 and November 2006. The intervention was completed by 89 patients (77%). A total of 78 subjects (67%) completed follow-up, 12 months after the completion of the intervention programme. The intervention showed no effects in reducing pain, pain disability or quality of life. The analysis of healthcare utilisation yielded no intervention effect., Conclusions: Cognitive behavioural intervention is feasible with immigrants with chronic disabling pain, but the evidence-based CBT programme, as well as exercise therapy supplemented with culturally sensitive aspects, showed no improvement.

Background: Many people with intellectual disabilities find it hard to control their anger and this often leads to aggression which can have serious consequences, such as exclusion from mainstream services and the need for potentially more expensive emergency placements., Aims: To evaluate the effectiveness of a cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) intervention for anger management in people with intellectual disabilities., Method: A cluster-randomised trial of group-based 12-week CBT, which took place in day services for people with intellectual disabilities and was delivered by care staff using a treatment manual. Participants were 179 service users identified as having problems with anger control randomly assigned to either anger management or treatment as usual. Assessments were conducted before the intervention, and at 16 weeks and 10 months after randomisation (trial registration: ISRCTN37509773)., Results: The intervention had only a small, and non-significant, effect on participants' reports of anger on the Provocation Index, the primary outcome measure (mean difference 2.8, 95% CI -1.7 to 7.4 at 10 months). However, keyworker Provocation Index ratings were significantly lower in both follow-up assessments, as were service-user ratings on another self-report anger measure based on personally salient triggers. Both service users and their keyworkers reported greater usage of anger coping skills at both follow-up assessments and keyworkers and home carers reported lower levels of challenging behaviour., Conclusions: The intervention was effective in improving anger control by people with intellectual disabilities. It provides evidence of the effectiveness of a CBT intervention for this client group and demonstrates that the staff who work with them can be trained and supervised to deliver such an intervention with reasonable fidelity.

Background: Psychological therapies have been shown to be effective in the treatment of depression. However, evidence is focused on individually delivered therapies, with less evidence for group-based therapies., Aims: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the efficacy of group-based psychological therapies for depression in primary care and the community., Method: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group database from inception to July 2010. The Cochrane risk of bias methodology was applied., Results: Twenty-three studies were included. The majority showed considerable risk of bias. Analysis of group cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) v. usual care alone (14 studies) showed a significant effect in favour of group CBT immediately post-treatment (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.55 (95% CI -0.78 to -0.32)). There was some evidence of benefit being maintained at short-term (SMD = -0.47 (95% CI -1.06 to 0.12)) and medium- to long-term follow-up (SMD = -0.47 (95% CI - 0.87 to -0.08)). Studies of group CBT v. individually delivered CBT therapy (7 studies) showed a moderate treatment effect in favour of individually delivered CBT immediately post-treatment (SMD = 0.38 (95% CI 0.09-0.66)) but no evidence of difference at short- or medium- to long-term follow-up. Four studies described comparisons for three other types of group psychological therapies., Conclusions: Group CBT confers benefit for individuals who are clinically depressed over that of usual care alone. Individually delivered CBT is more effective than group CBT immediately following treatment but after 3 months there is no evidence of difference. The quality of evidence is poor. Evidence about group psychological therapies not based on CBT is particularly limited.

Background: Early-onset child conduct problems are common and costly. A large number of studies and some previous reviews have focused on behavioural and cognitive-behavioural group-based parenting interventions, but methodological limitations are commonplace and evidence for the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these programmes has been unclear., Objectives: To assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of behavioural and cognitive-behavioural group-based parenting programmes for improving child conduct problems, parental mental health and parenting skills., Search Methods: We searched the following databases between 23 and 31 January 2011: CENTRAL (2011, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1950 to current), EMBASE (1980 to current), CINAHL (1982 to current), PsycINFO (1872 to current), Social Science Citation Index (1956 to current), ASSIA (1987 to current), ERIC (1966 to current), Sociological Abstracts (1963 to current), Academic Search Premier (1970 to current), Econlit (1969 to current), PEDE (1980 to current), Dissertations and Theses Abstracts (1980 to present), NHS EED (searched 31 January 2011), HEED (searched 31 January 2011), DARE (searched 31 January 2011), HTA (searched 31 January 2011), mRCT (searched 29 January 2011). We searched the following parent training websites on 31 January 2011: Triple P Library, Incredible Years Library and Parent Management Training. We also searched the reference lists of studies and reviews., Selection Criteria: We included studies if: (1) they involved randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-randomised controlled trials of behavioural and cognitive-behavioural group-based parenting interventions for parents of children aged 3 to 12 years with conduct problems, and (2) incorporated an intervention group versus a waiting list, no treatment or standard treatment control group. We only included studies that used at least one standardised instrument to measure child conduct problems., Data Collection and Analysis: Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias in the trials and the methodological quality of health economic studies. Two authors also independently extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information., Main Results: This review includes 13 trials (10 RCTs and three quasi-randomised trials), as well as two economic evaluations based on two of the trials. Overall, there were 1078 participants (646 in the intervention group; 432 in the control group). The results indicate that parent training produced a statistically significant reduction in child conduct problems, whether assessed by parents (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.53; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.72 to -0.34) or independently assessed (SMD -0.44; 95% CI -0.77 to -0.11). The intervention led to statistically significant improvements in parental mental health (SMD -0.36; 95% CI -0.52 to -0.20) and positive parenting skills, based on both parent reports (SMD -0.53; 95% CI -0.90 to -0.16) and independent reports (SMD -0.47; 95% CI -0.65 to -0.29). Parent training also produced a statistically significant reduction in negative or harsh parenting practices according to both parent reports (SMD -0.77; 95% CI -0.96 to -0.59) and independent assessments (SMD -0.42; 95% CI -0.67 to -0.16). Moreover, the intervention demonstrated evidence of cost-effectiveness. When compared to a waiting list control group, there was a cost of approximately $2500 (GBP 1712; EUR 2217) per family to bring the average child with clinical levels of conduct problems into the non-clinical range. These costs of programme delivery are modest when compared with the long-term health, social, educational and legal costs associated with childhood conduct problems., Authors' Conclusions: Behavioural and cognitive-behavioural group-based parenting interventions are effective and cost-effective for improving child conduct problems, parental mental health and parenting skills in the short term. The cost of programme delivery was modest when compared with the long-term health, social, educational and legal costs associated with childhood conduct problems. Further research is needed on the long-term assessment of outcomes.

Objective: To examine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of referral to group art therapy plus standard care, compared with referral to an activity group plus standard care and standard care alone, among people with schizophrenia., Design: A three-arm, parallel group, single-blind, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial. Participants were randomised via an independent and remote telephone randomisation service using permuted blocks, stratified by study centre., Setting: Study participants were recruited from secondary care mental health and social services in four UK centres., Participants: Potential participants were aged 18 years or over, had a clinical diagnosis of schizophrenia, confirmed by an examination of case notes, and provided written informed consent. We excluded those who were unable to speak sufficient English to complete the baseline assessment, those with severe cognitive impairment and those already receiving arts therapy., Interventions: Group art therapy was delivered by registered art therapists according to nationally agreed standards. Groups had up to eight members, lasted for 90 minutes and ran for 12 months. Members were given access to a range of art materials and encouraged to use these to express themselves freely. Activity groups were designed to control for the non-specific effects of group art therapy. Group facilitators offered various activities and encouraged participants to collectively select those they wanted to pursue. Standard care involved follow-up from secondary care mental health services and the option of referral to other services, except arts therapies, as required., Main Outcome Measures: Our co-primary outcomes were global functioning (measured using the Global Assessment of Functioning Scale - GAF) and mental health symptoms (measured using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale - PANSS) at 24 months. The main secondary outcomes were level of group attendance, social functioning, well-being, health-related quality of life, service utilisation and other costs measured 12 and 24 months after randomisation., Results: Four hundred and seventeen people were recruited, of whom 355 (85%) were followed up at 2 years. Eighty-six (61%) of those randomised to art therapy and 73 (52%) of those randomised to activity groups attended at least one group. No differences in primary outcomes were found between the three study arms. The adjusted mean difference between art therapy and standard care at 24 months was -0.9 [95% confidence interval (CI) -3.8 to 2.1] on the GAF Scale and 0.7 (95% CI -3.1 to 4.6) on the PANSS Scale. Differences in secondary outcomes were not found, except that those referred to an activity group had fewer positive symptoms of schizophrenia at 24 months than those randomised to art therapy. Secondary analysis indicated that attendance at art therapy groups was not associated with improvements in global functioning or mental health. Although the total cost of the art therapy group was lower than the cost of the two comparison groups, referral to group art therapy did not appear to provide a cost-effective use of resources., Conclusions: Referring people with established schizophrenia to group art therapy as delivered in this randomised trial does not appear to improve global functioning or mental health of patients or provide a more cost-effective use of resources than standard care alone., Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN 46150447., Funding: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 16, No. 8. See the HTA programme website for further project information., (© Queen’s Printer and Controller of HMSO 2012.)

Objectives: The aim of the REMiniscence groups for people with dementia and their family CAREgivers (REMCARE) study was to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of joint reminiscence groups for people with dementia and their family caregivers as compared with usual care., Design: A multicentre, pragmatic randomised controlled trial with two parallel arms - an intervention group and a usual-care control group - was carried out. A restricted dynamic method of randomisation was used with an overall allocation ratio of 1 : 1, restricted to ensure intervention groups of a viable size. Assessments, blind to treatment allocation, were carried out at baseline, 3 months and 10 months (primary end point)., Setting: Most participants were recruited through NHS Memory Clinics and Community Mental Health Teams for older people. Assessments were usually carried out in the person's home, and treatment groups were held in a variety of community settings., Participants: A total of 488 individuals (mean age 77.5 years) with mild to moderate dementia (meeting Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-Fourth Edition criteria), who were initially living in the community, and who had a relative or other caregiver maintaining regular contact, who could act as an informant and was willing and able to participate in the intervention, were recruited to the study. Most carers were spouses (71%). A total of 350 dyads completed the study., Interventions: The intervention consisted of joint reminiscence groups held weekly for 12 consecutive weeks, followed by monthly maintenance sessions for a further 7 months. The sessions followed a treatment manual, and were led by two trained facilitators in each centre, supported by a number of volunteers. Up to 12 dyads were invited to attend each group., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measures were self-reported quality of life for the person with dementia and psychological distress for the carer [General Health Questionnaire-28 item version (GHQ-28)]. Secondary outcome measures included autobiographical memory and activities of daily living for the person with dementia, carer stress for the carer and mood, relationship quality and service use and costs for both parties., Results: The intention-to-treat analysis identified no differences in outcome between the intervention and control conditions on primary or secondary outcomes [self-reported quality of life in Alzheimer's disease: mean difference 0.07, standard error (SE) 0.65; F = 0.48; p = 0.53]. Carers of people with dementia allocated to the reminiscence intervention reported a significant increase in anxiety on a subscale of the GHQ-28 at the 10-month end point (mean difference 1.25, SE 0.5; F = 8.28; p = 0.04). Compliance analyses suggested some benefits for people with dementia who attended more reminiscence sessions; however, carers attending more groups showed increased caregiving stress. Use of health- and social-care services was modest, with no significant difference in service use between conditions. Owing to negligible difference in quality-adjusted life-year gains (derived from European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions) between the conditions the planned full economic analysis was curtailed., Conclusions: This trial does not provide support for the effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of joint reminiscence groups for people with dementia and their carers. Although there may be some beneficial effects for people with dementia who attend sessions as planned, this must be viewed in the context of raised anxiety and stress in their carers. The reasons for these discrepant outcomes need to be explored further, and may necessitate reappraisal of the movement towards joint interventions., Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN42430123., Funding: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 16, No. 48. See the HTA programme website for further project information.

Background: Impairment in social functioning is a key component of personality disorder. Therefore psycho-education and problem solving (PEPS) therapy may benefit people with this disorder. Psycho-education aims to educate, build rapport, and motivate people for problem solving therapy. Problem solving therapy aims to help clients solve interpersonal problems positively and rationally, thereby improving social functioning and reducing distress. PEPS therapy has been evaluated with community adults with personality disorder in an exploratory trial. At the end of treatment, compared to a wait-list control group, those treated with PEPS therapy showed better social functioning, as measured by the Social Functioning Questionnaire (SFQ). A definitive evaluation is now being conducted to determine whether PEPS therapy is a clinically and cost-effective treatment for people with personality disorder, Methods: This is a pragmatic, two-arm, multi-centre, parallel, randomised controlled clinical trial. The target population is community-dwelling adults with one or more personality disorder, as identified by the International Personality Disorder Examination (IPDE). Inclusion criteria are: Living in the community (including residential or supported care settings); presence of one or more personality disorder; aged 18 or over; proficiency in spoken English; capacity to provide informed consent. Exclusion criteria are: Primary diagnosis of a functional psychosis; insufficient degree of literacy, comprehension or attention to be able to engage in trial therapy and assessments; currently engaged in a specific programme of psychological treatment for personality disorder or likely to start such treatment during the trial period; currently enrolled in any other trial. Suitable participants are randomly allocated to PEPS therapy plus treatment as usual (TAU) or TAU only. We aim to recruit 340 men and women. The primary outcome is social functioning as measured by the SFQ. A reduction (i.e., an improvement) of 2 points or more on the SFQ at follow-up 72 weeks post-randomisation is our pre-specified index of clinically significant change. Secondary outcomes include a reduction of unscheduled service usage and an increase in scheduled service usage; improved quality of life; and a reduction in mental distress., Discussion: PEPS therapy has potential as an economical, accessible, and acceptable intervention for people with personality disorder. The results from this randomised controlled trial will tell us if PEPS therapy is effective and cost-effective. If so, then it will be a useful treatment for inclusion in a broader menu of treatment options for this group of service users., Trial Registration: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number - ISRCTN70660936.

Objective: To examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of group therapy for self harm in young people., Design: Two arm, single (assessor) blinded parallel randomised allocation trial of a group therapy intervention in addition to routine care, compared with routine care alone. Randomisation was by minimisation controlling for baseline frequency of self harm, presence of conduct disorder, depressive disorder, and severity of psychosocial stress., Participants: Adolescents aged 12-17 years with at least two past episodes of self harm within the previous 12 months. Exclusion criteria were: not speaking English, low weight anorexia nervosa, acute psychosis, substantial learning difficulties (defined by need for specialist school), current containment in secure care. Setting Eight child and adolescent mental health services in the northwest UK., Interventions: Manual based developmental group therapy programme specifically designed for adolescents who harm themselves, with an acute phase over six weekly sessions followed by a booster phase of weekly groups as long as needed. Details of routine care were gathered from participating centres., Main Outcome Measures: Primary outcome was frequency of subsequent repeated episodes of self harm. Secondary outcomes were severity of subsequent self harm, mood disorder, suicidal ideation, and global functioning. Total costs of health, social care, education, and criminal justice sector services, plus family related costs and productivity losses, were recorded., Results: 183 adolescents were allocated to each arm (total n = 366). Loss to follow-up was low (<4%). On all outcomes the trial cohort as a whole showed significant improvement from baseline to follow-up. On the primary outcome of frequency of self harm, proportional odds ratio of group therapy versus routine care adjusting for relevant baseline variables was 0.99 (95% confidence interval 0.68 to 1.44, P = 0.95) at 6 months and 0.88 (0.59 to 1.33, P = 0.52) at 1 year. For severity of subsequent self harm the equivalent odds ratios were 0.81 (0.54 to 1.20, P = 0.29) at 6 months and 0.94 (0.63 to 1.40, P = 0.75) at 1 year. Total 1 year costs were higher in the group therapy arm (£21,781) than for routine care (£15,372) but the difference was not significant (95% CI -1416 to 10782, P = 0.132)., Conclusions: The addition of this targeted group therapy programme did not improve self harm outcomes for adolescents who repeatedly self harmed, nor was there evidence of cost effectiveness. The outcomes to end point for the cohort as a whole were better than current clinical expectations. Trial registration ISRCTN 20496110.

Background: Postnatal depression (PND) describes a wide range of distressing symptoms that can occur in women following childbirth. There is substantial evidence to support the use of cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) in the treatment of depression, and psychological therapies are recommended by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence as a first-line treatment for PND. However, access is limited owing to expense, waiting lists and availability of therapists. Group CBT may, therefore, offer a solution to these problems by reducing therapist time and increasing the number of available places for treatment., Objectives: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of group CBT compared with currently used packages of care for women with PND., Data Sources: Seventeen electronic bibliographic databases were searched (for example MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, EMBASE, PsycINFO, etc.), covering biomedical, health-related, science, social science and grey literature (including current research). Databases were searched from 1950 to January 2008. In addition, the reference lists of relevant articles were checked and various health services' related resources were consulted via the internet., Review Methods: The study population included women in the postpartum period (up to 1 year), meeting the criteria of a standardised PND diagnosis using the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-Fourth Edition, or scoring above cut-off on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS). No exclusion was made on the basis of the standardised depression screening/case finding instrument of standardised clinical assessment tool used to define PND. All full papers were read by two reviewers (AS and DS) who made independent decisions regarding inclusion or exclusion, and consensus, where possible, was obtained by meeting to compare decisions. In the event of disagreement, a third reviewer (EK) read the paper and made the decision. All data from included quantitative studies were extracted by one reviewer (AS) using a standardised data extraction form. All data from included qualitative studies were extracted by two reviewers (AS and AB) using a standardised data extraction form with disagreements resolved by discussion. Two different data extraction forms were used, one for the quantitative papers and a second for the qualitative papers., Results: Six studies met the inclusion criteria for the quantitative review. Three were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and three were non-randomised trials. Two studies met the inclusion criteria for the qualitative review. These were both treatment evaluations incorporating qualitative methods. Only one study was deemed appropriate for the decision problem; therefore a meta-analysis was not performed. This study indicated that the reduction in the EPDS score through group CBT compared with routine primary care (RPC) was 3.48 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.23 to 6.73] at the end of the treatment period. At 6-month follow-up the relative reduction in EPDS score was 4.48 (95% CI 1.01 to 7.95). Three studies showed the treatment to be effective in reducing depression when compared to RPC, usual care or waiting list groups. There was no adequate evidence on which to assess group CBT compared with other treatments for PND. Two studies of group CBT for PND were included in the qualitative review. Both studies demonstrated patient acceptability of group CBT for PND, although negative feelings towards group CBT were also identified. A de novo economic model was constructed to assess the cost-effectiveness of group CBT. The base-case results indicated a cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) of 46,462 pounds for group CBT compared with RPC. The 95% CI for this ratio ranged from 37,008 to 60,728 pounds. There was considerable uncertainty in the cost per woman of running a CBT course, of the appropriateness of efficacy data to the decision problem, and the residual length of benefit associated with group CBT. These were tested using univariate sensitivity analyses. Supplementary analyses that fitted distributions to the cost of treatment and the duration of comparative advantage reported a cost per QALY of 36,062 pounds (95% CI 20,464 to 59,262 pounds)., Limitations: The cost per QALY ratio for group CBT in PND was uncertain because of gaps in the evidence base. There was little quantitative or qualitative RCT evidence to assess the effectiveness of group CBT for PND. The evidence that was available was of low quality in the main because of poor reporting of the results. Furthermore, little information was reported on concurrent treatment used in the studies, which was controlled for in only two of the studies., Conclusions: Evidence from the clinical effectiveness review provided inconsistent and low quality information on which to base any interpretations for service provision. Although three of the included studies provided some indication that group psycho-education incorporating CBT is effective compared with RPC, there is enough doubt in the quality of the study, the level of CBT implemented in the group programmes, and the applicability to a PND population to limit any interpretations significantly. It is also considered that the place of group CBT in a stepped care programme needs to be identified, as well as there being a need for a clearer referral process for group CBT.

Background: Art Therapy has been promoted as a means of helping people who may find it difficult to express themselves verbally engage in psychological treatment. Group Art Therapy has been widely used as an adjunctive treatment for people with schizophrenia but there have been few attempts to examine its effects and cost effectiveness has not been examined. The MATISSE study aims to evaluate the clinical and cost effectiveness of group Art Therapy for people with schizophrenia., Method/design: The MATISSE study is a three-arm, parallel group, pragmatic, randomised, controlled trial of referral to group Art Therapy plus standard care, referral to an attention control 'activity' group plus standard care, or standard care alone. Study participants were recruited from inpatient and community-based mental health and social care services at four centres in England and Northern Ireland. Participants were aged over 18 years with a clinical diagnosis of schizophrenia, confirmed by an examination of case notes using operationalised criteria. Participants were then randomised via an independent and remote telephone randomisation service using permuted stacked blocks, stratified by site. Art Therapy and activity groups were made available to participants once a week for up to 12 months. Outcome measures were assessed by researchers masked to allocation status at 12 and 24 months after randomisation. Participants and care givers were aware which arm of the trial participants were allocated to. The primary outcomes for the study are global functioning (measured using the Global Assessment of Functioning scale) and mental health symptoms (measured using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale) assessed at 24 months. Secondary outcomes were assessed at 12 and 24 months and comprise levels of group attendance, social function, satisfaction with care, mental wellbeing, and costs., Discussion: We believe that this is the first large scale pragmatic trial of Art Therapy for people with schizophrenia., Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN46150447.

Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of group cognitive behavior therapy (gCBT) in comparison with routine primary care for women with postnatal depression in the UK., Methods: Our analysis was based on a systematic literature review of the relative clinical effectiveness of gCBT compared with routine primary care and further reviews, supplemented with expert opinion of the likely cost of providing gCBT and the duration of comparative advantage for gCBT. Raw data were used to estimate a statistical relationship between changes in the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Score (EPDS) values and changes in short-form six dimensions' (SF-6D) values. A mathematical model was constructed, and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were undertaken to estimate the mean cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and to evaluate the expected value of perfect information (EVPI)., Results: The mean cost per QALY from the stochastic analysis was estimated to be pound36,062; however, there was considerable uncertainty around this value. The EVPI was estimated to be greater than pound64 million; the key uncertainties were in the cost per woman of providing treatment and in the statistical relationship between changes in EPDS values and changes in SF-6D values. The expected value of perfect partial information for both of these parameters was in excess of pound25 million., Conclusions: Given the current information, the use of gCBT does not appear to be cost-effective; however, this decision is uncertain. The value of information analyses conducted indicates that further research to provide robust information on key parameters is needed and appears justified in cost-effective terms.

Background: Internet administered cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) is a promising new way to deliver psychological treatment, but its effectiveness in regular care settings and in relation to more traditional CBT group treatment has not yet been determined. The primary aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of Internet-and group administered CBT for panic disorder (with or without agoraphobia) in a randomised trial within a regular psychiatric care setting. The second aim of the study was to establish the cost-effectiveness of these interventions., Methods: Patients referred for treatment by their physician, or self-referred, were telephone-screened by a psychiatric nurse. Patients fulfilling screening criteria underwent an in-person structured clinical interview carried out by a psychiatrist. A total of 113 consecutive patients were then randomly assigned to 10 weeks of either guided Internet delivered CBT (n = 53) or group CBT (n = 60). After treatment, and at a 6-month follow-up, patients were again assessed by the psychiatrist, blind to treatment condition., Results: Immediately after randomization 9 patients dropped out, leaving 104 patients who started treatment. Patients in both treatment conditions showed significant improvement on the main outcome measure, the Panic Disorder Severity Scale (PDSS) after treatment. For the Internet treatment the within-group effect size (pre-post) on the PDSS was Cohen's d = 1.73, and for the group treatment it was d = 1.63. Between group effect sizes were low and treatment effects were maintained at 6-months follow-up. We found no statistically significant differences between the two treatment conditions using a mixed models approach to account for missing data. Group CBT utilised considerably more therapist time than did Internet CBT. Defining effect as proportion of PDSS responders, the cost-effectiveness analysis concerning therapist time showed that Internet treatment had superior cost-effectiveness ratios in relation to group treatment both at post-treatment and follow-up., Conclusions: This study provides support for the effectiveness of Internet CBT in a psychiatric setting for patients with panic disorder, and suggests that it is equally effective as the more widely used group administered CBT in reducing panic-and agoraphobic symptoms, as well as being more cost effective with respect to therapist time., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00845260.

Background: Although some studies indicate that bipolar disorder causes high health care resources consumption, no study is available addressing a cost estimation of bipolar disorder in Spain. The aim of this observational study was to evaluate healthcare resource utilization and the associated direct cost in patients with manic episodes in the Spanish setting., Methods: Retrospective descriptive study was carried out in a consecutive sample of patients with a DSM-IV diagnosis of bipolar type I disorder with or without psychotic symptoms, aged 18 years or older, and who were having an active manic episode at the time of inclusion. Information regarding the current manic episode was collected retrospectively from the medical record and patient interview., Results: Seven hundred and eighty-four evaluable patients, recruited by 182 psychiatrists, were included in the study. The direct cost associated with healthcare resource utilization during the manic episode was high, with a mean cost of nearly 4,500 euros per patient, of which approximately 55% corresponded to the cost of hospitalization, 30% to the cost of psychopharmacological treatment and 10% to the cost of specialized care., Conclusions: Our results show the high cost of management of the patient with a manic episode, which is mainly due to hospitalizations. In this regard, any intervention on the management of the manic patient that could reduce the need for hospitalization would have a significant impact on the costs of the disease.

Background: In the Netherlands, the first adolescents with diabetes mellitus type 2 as a result of obesity have recently been diagnosed. Therefore, it is very important that programs aiming at the prevention of type 2 diabetes of obese adolescents are developed and evaluated., Methods: Go4it is a multidisciplinary group treatment that focuses on: 1) increasing awareness of the current dietary and physical activity behaviour (i.e. energy balance behaviour), 2) improving diet, 3) decreasing sedentary behaviour, 4) increasing levels of physical activity, and 5) coping with difficult situations. Go4it consists of 7 sessions with an interval of 2-3 weeks.The effectiveness of the multidisciplinary group treatment compared with usual care (i.e. referral to a dietician) was evaluated in a randomised controlled trial. We examined effects on BMI(sds), body composition, energy expenditure, glucose tolerance and insulin resistance (primary outcome measure), as well as dietary and physical activity behaviour and quality of life. An economic evaluation from a societal perspective was conducted alongside the randomised trial to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the multidisciplinary treatment program vs. usual care., Discussion: In this paper we described a multidisciplinary treatment program (Go4it) for obese adolescents and the design of a randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation to evaluate its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness., Trial Registration: Netherlands Trial Register (ISRCTN27626398).

Intensive group training using principles of graded activity has been proven to be effective in occupational care for workers with chronic low back pain. Objective of the study was to compare the effects of an intensive group training protocol aimed at returning to normal daily activities and guideline physiotherapy for primary care patients with non-specific chronic low back pain. The study was designed as pragmatic randomised controlled trial with a setup of 105 primary care physiotherapists in 49 practices and 114 patients with non-specific low back pain of more than 12 weeks duration participated in the study. In the intensive group training protocol exercise therapy, back school and operant-conditioning behavioural principles are combined. Patients were treated during 10 individual sessions along 20 group sessions. Usual care consisted of physiotherapy according to the Dutch guidelines for Low Back Pain. Main outcome measures were functional disability (Roland Morris disability questionnaire), pain intensity, perceived recovery and sick leave because of low back pain assessed at baseline and after 6, 13, 26 and 52 weeks. Both an intention-to-treat analysis and a per-protocol analysis were performed. Multilevel analysis did not show significant differences between both treatment groups on any outcome measures during the complete follow-up period, with one exception. After 26 weeks the protocol group showed more reduction in pain intensity than the guideline group, but this difference was absent after 52 weeks. We finally conclude that an intensive group training protocol was not more effective than usual physiotherapy for chronic low back pain.

Aims: To compare the performance of competing and complementary interventions for prevention or treatment of problem drinking and alcohol dependence. To provide an example of how health maximising decision-makers might use performance measures such as cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) league tables to formulate an optimal package of interventions for problem drinking and alcohol dependence., Methods: A time-dependent state-transition model was used to estimate QALYs gained per person for each intervention as compared to usual care in the relevant target population., Results: Cost per QALY estimates for each of the interventions fall below any putative funding threshold for developed economies. Interventions for problem drinkers appear to offer better value than interventions targeted at those with a history of severe physical dependence., Conclusions: Formularies such as Australia's Medicare should include a comprehensive package of interventions for problem drinking and alcohol dependence.

Controlled intervention studies carried out in families of schizophrenia patients have been shown to have a positive impact in relapse prevention, but it remains to be seen whether different forms of family intervention affect outcomes other than relapse and hospital readmission in different ways. This study compared the outcome profile of relevant clinical variables after two different family intervention strategies for schizophrenia patients in public health care in a Spanish sample. We conducted a randomized controlled study comparing (1) a relatives group (RG) and (2) a single-family behavioral family therapy (BFT), both offered as standard treatment in one catchment area in Valencia. All randomized patients were included in the main analysis, and all cases remained in the therapy group to which they were originally assigned regardless of whether they suffered a relapse. The relapse rate at 12 months for the 87 cases studied was not significantly different in the two groups, but the two approaches did affect outcomes other than relapse and rehospitalization (such as social functioning, dose of antipsychotic medication, "delusions" and "thought disorder") in different ways. The BFT approach offered more advantages than the RG approach. The results suggest that these approaches should always be implemented in a clinical environment in a Mediterranean setting.