ABSTRACT
Objective: The diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer is associated with significant distress that has huge impact on survivors' quality of life. The objective of this study is to assess the effectiveness of an integrated intervention "Moving on After Breast Cancer (ABC) Plus culturally adapted Cognitive Behavior Therapy" (Moving on ABC Plus). Method: This is a randomized controlled trial that aims to recruit 354 breast cancer survivors from the inpatient and outpatient oncology departments in public and private hospitals in Karachi, Hyderabad, Lahore, Multan, and Rawalpindi in Pakistan. Patients scoring 10 or above on either the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and/or the Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7) will be recruited. Baseline assessments will include Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast; EuroQol-5D; Multidimensional Scale for Perceived Social Support; Intrusive Thoughts Scale; and Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. Participants randomized into intervention arm, Moving on ABC Plus, will receive 12 individual therapy sessions over 4 months. Follow-up will be completed at 4- and 6-month post-randomization, using all baseline instruments along with the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ-8). We will also explore the participants', their family members', and the therapists' experiences of the trial and intervention. Results: We will be assessing the effectiveness of intervention in reducing depression and anxiety in breast cancer survivors as a primary outcome of the trial. The secondary outcomes will include effectiveness of intervention in terms of reduction in intrusive thoughts and improvement in health-related quality of life, self-esteem, and perceived social support. Conclusion: The results of the study will inform the design of a future larger randomized control trial with long-term follow-up.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Self-harm is a serious public health problem. A culturally adapted manual-assisted problem-solving training (C-MAP) intervention improved and sustained a reduction in suicidal ideation, hopelessness, and depression compared with treatment as usual (TAU) alone. Here, we evaluate its cost-effectiveness. METHODS: Patients admitted after an episode of self-harm were randomized individually to either C-MAP plus TAU or TAU alone in Karachi. Improvement in health-related quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) was measured using the EQ-5D with 3 levels instrument at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months after randomization. The primary economic outcome was health service cost per QALY gained as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, based on 2019 US$ and a 6-month time horizon. Nonparametric bootstrapping was used to assess uncertainties and sensitivity analysis to examine the impact of hospitalization costs. RESULTS: A total of 108 and 113 participants were enrolled among the intervention and standard arms, respectively. The intervention resulted in 0.04 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.00-0.08) more QALYs 6 months after enrolment. The mean cost per participant in the intervention arm was $1001 (95% CI 968-1031), resulting in an incremental cost of the intervention of $640 (95% CI 595-679). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the C-MAP intervention versus TAU was $16 254 (95% CI 7116-99 057) per QALY gained. The probability that C-MAP is cost-effective was between 66% and 83% for cost-effective thresholds between $20 000 and $30 000. Cost-effectiveness results remained robust to sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: C-MAP may be a valuable self-harm intervention. Further studies with longer follow-up and larger sample sizes are needed to draw reliable conclusions.
Subject(s)
Psychosocial Intervention , Self-Injurious Behavior , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Humans , Pakistan , Quality-Adjusted Life YearsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Self-harm is a serious public health problem. A culturally adapted manual-assisted problem-solving training (C-MAP) intervention improved and sustained the reduction in suicidal ideation, hopelessness, and depression compared with treatment as usual (TAU) alone. Here, we evaluate its cost-effectiveness. METHODS: Patients admitted after an episode of self-harm were randomized individually to either C-MAP plus TAU or TAU alone in Karachi. Improvement in health-related quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) was measured using the Euro Qol-5D-3L instrument at baseline and at 3 months and 6 months after randomization. The primary economic outcome was health service cost per QALY gained as the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, based on 2019 US dollars and a 6-month time horizon. Nonparametric bootstrapping was used to assess uncertainties, and sensitivity analysis to examine the impact of hospitalization costs. RESULTS: A total of 108 and 113 participants were enrolled among the intervention and standard arms, respectively. The intervention resulted in 0.04 more QALYs (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.00-0.08) 6 months after enrolment. The mean cost per participant in the intervention arm was US $1001 (95% CI 968-1031), resulting in an incremental cost of the intervention of US $640 (95% CI 595-679). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for the C-MAP intervention versus TAU was US $16 254 (95% CI 7116-99 057) per QALY gained. The probability that C-MAP is cost-effective was between 66% and 83% for cost-effective thresholds between US $20 000 and US $30 000. Cost-effectiveness results remained robust to sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: C-MAP may be a valuable self-harm intervention. Further studies with longer follow-up and larger sample sizes are needed to draw reliable conclusions.
