We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Dynamic interpersonal therapy (DIT) is a brief, structured psychodynamic psychotherapy with demonstrated efficacy in treating major depressive disorder (MDD). The aim of the study was to determine whether DIT is an acceptable and efficacious treatment for MDD patients in China.
Method
Patients were randomized to 16-week treatments with either DIT plus antidepressant medication (DIT + ADM; n = 66), general supportive therapy plus antidepressant medication (GST + ADM; n = 75) or antidepressant medication alone (ADM; n = 70). The Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) administered by blind raters was the primary efficacy measure. Assessments were completed during the acute 16-week treatment and up to 12-month posttreatment.
Results
The group × time interaction was significant for the primary outcome HAMD (F = 2.900, df1 = 10, df2 = 774.72, p = 0.001) in the acute treatment phase. Pairwise comparisons showed a benefit of DIT + ADM over ADM at weeks 12 [least-squares (LS) mean difference = −3.161, p = 0.007] and 16 (LS mean difference = −3.237, p = 0.004). Because of the unexpected high attrition during the posttreatment follow-up phase, analyses of follow-up data were considered exploratory. Differences between DIT + ADM and ADM remained significant at the 1-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up (ps range from 0.001 to 0.027). DIT + ADM had no advantage over GST + ADM during the acute treatment phase. However, at the 12-month follow-up, patients who received DIT remained less depressed.
Conclusions
Acute treatment with DIT or GST in combination with ADM was similarly efficacious in reducing depressive symptoms and yielded a better outcome than ADM alone. DIT may provide MDD patients with long-term benefits in symptom improvement but results must be viewed with caution.
The emergence of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) has revolutionized the prevention of stroke-related non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Although several DOACs are available, studies comparing the cost effectiveness of DOACs with vitamin K antagonists for NVAF are scarce. The objective of this study was to assess the cost effectiveness of DOACs and warfarin from the Hong Kong public institutional perspective to inform formulary listing decisions.
Methods
A previously developed Markov model was adapted to simulate the lifetime disease progression of a hypothetical cohort of 1,000 patients. Net monetary costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were computed for the following competing alternatives: warfarin, apixaban (5 mg twice daily), dabigatran 110mg or 150mg (twice daily), and rivaroxaban (20mg once daily). Model inputs were sourced from local real-world evidence, landmark trials, and comprehensive literature reviews. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses and deterministic sensitivity analyses were conducted to address study uncertainties. The willingness-to-pay threshold was set at one times the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita (USD 46,091) per QALY gained.
Results
In base case results, all DOACs provided greater improvements in QALYs at a lower cost than warfarin. Using apixaban as the reference for comparisons among the DOACs, dabigatran 110 mg resulted in greater costs and lower QALY gains and was dominated by apixaban, whereas dabigatran 150 mg provided an incremental QALY of 0.005 at an incremental cost of USD 326, leading to an ICER of USD 67,633 per QALY. The lifetime cost associated with rivaroxaban was lower than for apixaban (-USD 151), but with lower QALY gains (-0.147), resulting in an ICER of USD 1,029 per QALY. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the probability of warfarin, rivaroxaban 20 mg, dabigatran 110 mg, dabigatran 150 mg, and apixaban 5 mg being cost effective out of 2,000 iterations was 0 percent, 0 percent, 29.4 percent, 33.2 percent, and 37.4 percent, respectively.
Conclusions
The results indicated that apixaban was the most cost-effective treatment in the management of NVAF, compared with other DOACs and warfarin. This conclusion was consistent under all the uncertainty test scenarios.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.