Search

Background There is mounting evidence that people with severe mental illness have unhealthy lifestyles, high rates of cardiovascular and metabolic diseases, and greater risk of early mortality. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of a health promotion intervention seeking to improve physical health and reduce substance use in people with psychosis.MethodsParticipants with a psychotic disorder, aged 18-65 years old and registered on an enhanced care approach programme or equivalent were recruited from community mental health teams in six mental health trusts in England. Participants were randomisation to either standard community mental health team care (treatment as usual) or treatment as usual with an integrated health promotion intervention (IMPaCT). Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses from health and social care and societal perspectives were conducted alongside a cluster randomised controlled trial. Total health and social care costs and total societal costs at 12 and 15 months were calculated as well as cost-effectiveness (incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves) at 15 months based on quality of life (SF-36 mental and physical health components, primary outcome measures) and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) using two measures, EQ-5D-3L and SF-36. Data were analysed using bootstrapped regressions with covariates for relevant baseline variables.Results At 12-15 months 301 participants had full data needed to be included in the economic evaluation. There were no differences in adjusted health and social care costs (£95, 95% CI -£1410 to £1599) or societal costs (£675, 95% CI -£1039 to £2388) between the intervention and control arms. Similarly, there were no differences between the groups in the SF-36 mental component (-0.80, 95% CI -3.66 to 2.06), SF-36 physical component (-0.68, 95% CI -3.01 to 1.65), QALYs estimated from the SF-36 (-0.00, -0.01 to 0.00) or QALYs estimated from the EQ-5D-3L (0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.02).Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves for all four outcomes and from both cost perspectives indicate that the probability of the health promotion intervention being cost-effective does not exceed 0.4 for willingness to pay thresholds ranging from £0-£50000.Conclusions Alongside no evidence of additional quality of life/clinical benefit, there is also no evidence of cost-effectiveness.Trial registration ISRCTN58667926: http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN58667926Date retrospectively registered: 23/04/2010. Recruitment start date: 01/03/2010

The aims of the study were to determine the prevalence of cardiometabolic risk factors and establish the proportion of people with psychosis meeting criteria for the metabolic syndrome (MetS). The study also aimed to identify the key lifestyle behaviours associated with increased risk of the MetS and to investigate whether the MetS is associated with illness severity and degree of functional impairment.Baseline data were collected as part of a large randomized controlled trial (IMPaCT RCT). The study took place within community mental health teams in five Mental Health NHS Trusts in urban and rural locations across England. A total of 450 randomly selected out-patients, aged 18-65 years, with an established psychotic illness were recruited. We ascertained the prevalence rates of cardiometabolic risk factors, illness severity and functional impairment and calculated rates of the MetS, using International Diabetes Federation (IDF) and National Cholesterol Education Program Third Adult Treatment Panel criteria.High rates of cardiometabolic risk factors were found. Nearly all women and most men had waist circumference exceeding the IDF threshold for central obesity. Half the sample was obese (body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2) and a fifth met the criteria for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Females were more likely to be obese than males (61% v. 42%, p0.001). Of the 308 patients with complete laboratory measures, 57% (n = 175) met the IDF criteria for the MetS.In the UK, the prevalence of cardiometabolic risk factors in individuals with psychotic illnesses is much higher than that observed in national general population studies as well as in most international studies of patients with psychosis.