Fibromyalgia (FM) syndrome represents a great challenge for clinicians and researchers because the efficacy of currently available treatments is limited. This study examined the efficacy of mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) for reducing functional impairment as well as the role of mindfulness-related constructs as mediators of treatment outcomes for people with FM. Two hundred twenty-five participants with FM were randomized into 3 study arms: MBSR plus treatment-as-usual (TAU), FibroQoL (multicomponent intervention for FM) plus TAU, and TAU alone. The primary endpoint was functional impact (measured with the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire Revised), and secondary outcomes included “fibromyalginess,” anxiety and depression, pain catastrophising, perceived stress, and cognitive dysfunction. The differences in outcomes between groups at post-treatment assessment (primary endpoint) and 12-month follow-up were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models and mediational models through path analyses. Mindfulness-based stress reduction was superior to TAU both at post-treatment (large effect sizes) and at follow-up (medium to large effect sizes), and MBSR was also superior to FibroQoL post-treatment (medium to large effect sizes), but in the long term, it was only modestly better (significant differences only in pain catastrophising and fibromyalginess). Immediately post-treatment, the number needed to treat for 20% improvement in MBSR vs TAU and FibroQoL was 4.0 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.1-6.5) and 5.0 (95% CI = 2.7-37.3). An unreliable number needed to treat value of 9 (not computable 95% CI) was found for FibroQoL vs TAU. Changes produced by MBSR in functional impact were mediated by psychological inflexibility and the mindfulness facet acting with awareness. These findings are discussed in relation to previous studies of psychological treatments for FM.

NCT00550966.

A 2-month psychoeducational intervention improves the functional status of FM patients to a greater extent than usual care, at least in the short-term. The social desirability bias did not explain the reported outcomes. Trait anxiety was associated with response to treatment.

BackgroundNon-adherence to antidepressants generates higher costs for the treatment of depression. Little is known about the cost-effectiveness of pharmacist's interventions aimed at improving adherence to antidepressants. The study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a community pharmacist intervention in comparison with usual care in depressed patients initiating treatment with antidepressants in primary care.MethodsPatients were recruited by general practitioners and randomized to community pharmacist intervention (87) that received an educational intervention and usual care (92). Adherence to antidepressants, clinical symptoms, Quality-Adjusted Life-Years (QALYs), use of healthcare services and productivity losses were measured at baseline, 3 and 6 months.ResultsThere were no significant differences between groups in costs or effects. From a societal perspective, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for the community pharmacist intervention compared with usual care was €1,866 for extra adherent patient and €9,872 per extra QALY. In terms of remission of depressive symptoms, the usual care dominated the community pharmacist intervention. If willingness to pay (WTP) is €30,000 per extra adherent patient, remission of symptoms or QALYs, the probability of the community pharmacist intervention being cost-effective was 0.71, 0.46 and 0.75, respectively (societal perspective). From a healthcare perspective, the probability of the community pharmacist intervention being cost-effective in terms of adherence, QALYs and remission was of 0.71, 0.76 and 0.46, respectively, if WTP is €30,000.ConclusionA brief community pharmacist intervention addressed to depressed patients initiating antidepressant treatment showed a probability of being cost-effective of 0.71 and 0.75 in terms of improvement of adherence and QALYs, respectively, when compared to usual care. Regular implementation of the community pharmacist intervention is not recommended.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00794196

Decision-makers have to prioritize their budget on the treatment option that is the most cost effective for the management of a specific patient group. From government as well as health care perspectives, this study shows that a GACT is more cost effective than pharmacological treatment in management of FM.

Abstract:Major depression is associated with high burden, disability and costs. Non-adherence limits the effectiveness of antidepressants. Community pharmacists (CP) are in a privileged position to help patients cope with antidepressant treatment. The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of a CP intervention on primary care patients who had initiated antidepressant treatment. Newly diagnosed primary care patients were randomised to usual care (UC) (92) or pharmacist intervention (87). Patients were followed up at 6 months and evaluated three times (Baseline, and at 3 and 6 months). Outcome measurements included clinical severity of depression (PHQ-9), health-related quality of life (HRQOL) (Euroqol-5D) and satisfaction with pharmacy care. Adherence was continuously registered from the computerised pharmacy records. Non-adherence was defined as refilling less than 80% of doses or having a medicationfree gap of more than 1 month. Patients in the intervention group were more likely to remain adherent at 3 and 6 month follow-up but the difference was not statistically significant.Patients in the intervention group showed greater statistically significant improvement in HRQOL compared with UC patients both in the main analysis and PP analyses. No statistically significant differences were observed in clinical symptoms or satisfaction with the pharmacy service. The results of our study indicate that a brief intervention in community pharmacies does not improve depressed patients' adherence or clinical symptoms. This intervention helped patients to improve their HRQOL, which is an overall measure of patient status.

IntroductionCognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-recommended pharmacologic treatments (RPTs; pregabalin, duloxetine, and milnacipran) are effective treatment options for fibromyalgia (FM) syndrome and are currently recommended by clinical guidelines. We compared the cost-utility from the healthcare and societal perspectives of CBT versus RPT (combination of pregabalin + duloxetine) and usual care (TAU) groups in the treatment of FM.MethodsThe economic evaluation was conducted alongside a 6-month, multicenter, randomized, blinded, parallel group, controlled trial. In total, 168 FM patients from 41 general practices in Zaragoza (Spain) were randomized to CBT (n = 57), RPT (n = 56), or TAU (n = 55). The main outcome measures were Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs, assessed by using the EuroQoL-5D questionnaire) and improvements in health-related quality of life (HRQoL, assessed by using EuroQoL-5D visual analogue scale, EQ-VAS). The costs of healthcare use were estimated from patient self-reports (Client Service Receipt Inventory). Cost-utility was assessed by using the net-benefit approach and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves (CEACs).ResultsOn average, the total costs per patient in the CBT group (1,847€) were significantly lower than those in patients receiving RPT (3,664€) or TAU (3,124€). Patients receiving CBT reported a higher quality of life (QALYs and EQ-VAS scores); the differences between groups were significant only for EQ-VAS. From a complete case-analysis approach (base case), the point estimates of the cost-effectiveness ratios resulted in dominance for the CBT group in all of the comparisons performed, by using both QALYs and EQ-VAS as outcomes. These findings were confirmed by bootstrap analyses, net-benefit curves, and CEACs. Two additional sensitivity analyses (intention-to-treat analysis and per-protocol analysis) indicated that the results were robust. The comparison of RPT with TAU yielded no clear preference for either treatment when using QALYs, although RPT was determined to be more cost-effective than TAU when evaluating EQ-VAS.ConclusionsBecause of lower costs, CBT is the most cost-effective treatment for adult FM patients. Implementation in routine medical care would require policymakers to develop more-widespread public access to trained and experienced therapists in group-based forms of CBT.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN10804772. Registered 29 September 2008.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13075-014-0451-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The rate of IMNA is high when all medications are taken into account. Attempts to strengthen trust in resident general practitioners and improve motivation to initiate a needed medication in the general young and older immigrant population should be addressed in Catalan PC.