DESIGN: We estimated the cost-effectiveness ratios of three treatments for heroin dependence. We used a microcosting methodology to determine fixed, variable, and societal costs of each intervention. Cost data were collected from investigators, staff, and project records on the number and type of resources used and unit costs; societal costs for participants' time were estimated using Malaysia's minimum wage. Costs were estimated from a provider and societal perspective and reported in 2004 US dollars.
SETTING: Muar, Malaysia.
PARTICIPANTS: 126 patients enrolled in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial in Malaysia (2003-2005) receiving counseling and buprenorphine, naltrexone, or placebo for treatment of heroin dependence.
MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome measures included days in treatment, maximum consecutive days of heroin abstinence, days to first heroin use, and days to heroin relapse. Secondary outcome measures included treatment retention, injection drug use, illicit opiate use, AIDS Risk Inventory total score, and drug risk and sex risk subscores.
FINDINGS: Buprenorphine was more effective and more costly than naltrexone for all primary and most secondary outcomes. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were below $50 for primary outcomes, mostly below $350 for secondary outcomes. Naltrexone was dominated by placebo for all secondary outcomes at almost all endpoints. Incremental treatment costs were driven mainly by medication costs, especially the price of buprenorphine.
CONCLUSIONS: Buprenorphine appears to be a cost-effective alternative to naltrexone that might enhance economic productivity and reduce drug use over a longer term.
METHODS: Thirty-six players were divided into 3 groups; FIFA 11+, HarmoKnee and control (n = 12 per group). These exercises were performed 3 times per week for 2 months (24 sessions). The CSR, DCR and FSR were measured before and after the intervention.
RESULTS: After training, the CSR and DCR of knee muscles in both groups were found to be lower than the published normal values (0.61, 0.72, and 0.78 during 60°.s(-1), 180°.s(-1) and 300°.s(-1), respectively). The CSR (60°.s(-1)) increased by 8% and FSR in the quadriceps of the non-dominant leg by 8% in the 11+. Meanwhile, the DCR in the dominant and non-dominant legs were reduced by 40% and 30% respectively in the 11+. The CSR (60°.s(-1)) in the non-dominant leg showed significant differences between the 11+, HarmoKnee and control groups (p = 0.02). As for the DCR analysis between groups, there were significant differences in the non-dominant leg between both programs with the control group (p = 0.04). For FSR no significant changes were found between groups.
CONCLUSIONS: It can be concluded that the 11+ improved CSR and FSR, but the HarmoKnee program did not demonstrate improvement. We suggest adding more training elements to the HarmoKnee program that aimed to enhance hamstring strength (CSR, DCR and FSR). Professional soccer players have higher predisposition of getting knee injuries because hamstring to quadriceps ratio were found to be lower than the average values. It seems that the 11+ have potentials to improve CSR and FSR as well as prevent knee injuries in soccer players.