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.
Keywords: cost-effectiveness; costs; health utilities; quality of life; resource use; self-harm.
Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.