BACKGROUND:Schema-focused therapy (SFT) and transference-focused psychotherapy (TFP) for borderline personality disorder were recently compared in a randomised multicentre trial. AIMS: To assess the societal cost-effectiveness of SFT v. TFP in treating borderline personality disorder. METHOD: Costs were assessed by interview. Health-related quality of life was measured using EQ-5D. Outcomes were costs per recovered patient (recovery assessed with the Borderline Personality Disorder Severity Index) and costs per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). RESULTS:Mean 4-year bootstrapped costs were euro37 826 for SFT and euro46 795 for TFP (95% uncertainty interval for difference -21 775 to 3546); QALYs were 2.15 for SFT and 2.27 for TFP (95% UI -0.51 to 0.28). The percentages of patients who recovered were 52% and 29% respectively. The SFT intervention was less costly and more effective than TFP (dominant), for recovery; it saved euro90 457 for one QALY loss. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the initial slight disadvantage in QALYs, there is a high probability that compared with TFP, SFT is a cost-effective treatment for borderline personality disorder.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Schema-focused therapy (SFT) and transference-focused psychotherapy (TFP) for borderline personality disorder were recently compared in a randomised multicentre trial. AIMS: To assess the societal cost-effectiveness of SFT v. TFP in treating borderline personality disorder. METHOD: Costs were assessed by interview. Health-related quality of life was measured using EQ-5D. Outcomes were costs per recovered patient (recovery assessed with the Borderline Personality Disorder Severity Index) and costs per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). RESULTS: Mean 4-year bootstrapped costs were euro37 826 for SFT and euro46 795 for TFP (95% uncertainty interval for difference -21 775 to 3546); QALYs were 2.15 for SFT and 2.27 for TFP (95% UI -0.51 to 0.28). The percentages of patients who recovered were 52% and 29% respectively. The SFT intervention was less costly and more effective than TFP (dominant), for recovery; it saved euro90 457 for one QALY loss. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the initial slight disadvantage in QALYs, there is a high probability that compared with TFP, SFT is a cost-effective treatment for borderline personality disorder.
Authors: Federico Amianto; Andrea Ferrero; Andrea Pierò; Elisabetta Cairo; Giuseppe Rocca; Barbara Simonelli; Simona Fassina; Giovanni Abbate-Daga; Secondo Fassino Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2011-11-21 Impact factor: 3.630
Authors: Lotte H J M Lemmens; Arnoud Arntz; Frenk P M L Peeters; Steven D Hollon; Anne Roefs; Marcus J H Huibers Journal: Trials Date: 2011-06-14 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Marjon Nadort; Arnoud Arntz; Johannes H Smit; Josephine Giesen-Bloo; Merijn Eikelenboom; Philip Spinhoven; Thea van Asselt; Michel Wensing; Richard van Dyck Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2009-10-06 Impact factor: 3.630