In this study we have compared two different types of therapies i.e. herbal and allopathic system of therapies for Depression and studied them from the social perspectives. The Hypericum perforatum is compared with Fluoxetine [HCL] in terms of cost-utility and financial savings thereby evaluating its influence on annual expenditure of depressive patients that were randomly selected from 178 union councils of the city of Karachi, Pakistan. For both system of therapies a total of 356 patients were selected by stratified random sampling. Taking frequency of depression as '1' annually with discount rate at 3% for calculating the burden-of-illness in terms of disability-adjusted-life-years. The cost-utility and the budget-impact assessments were carried out to assess incremental-cost-effectiveness-ratio, and the budget-impact-per-onset as well as budget-impact-per-year values. In comparison with the Fluoxetine therapy, the Hypericum perforatum was found to relieve symptoms in 21.47% less cost; owing 29.23% less disability-adjusted-life-years and 21.45% less budget-impact-per-onset as well as budget-impact-peryear. The annual mean incremental-cost-effectiveness-ratio was found to be at 36.95±270.74 (less than GDP per capita threshold of Rs. 38,173.02). Hypericum perforatum provide the optimal utility with less impact on budget of a patient in comparison with the treatment of symptoms of depression with Fluoxetine.

The aim of the present study was to assess and compare the allopathic and herbal therapies by carrying out cost of illness and cost benefit analysis after propagation of basic epidemiological and pharmacoeconomic data. The data was recorded from the patient for 3 major diseases, common cold, depression and trauma in all 178 union councils of the city of Karachi, Pakistan, rationalizing the benefits and hence proving the preference of herbal over allopathic therapy. The stratified random sampling (n=178) was used, selecting individual sets of 178 patients for each kind of therapy, utilizing data of epidemiology. The direct and indirect costs were calculated for therapies for selected diseases in patients. However, benefits were analysed by developing uniform method of analysis of costs and benefits, comparing and propagating individual data of union councils on the city level. The differences in costs of illnesses between allopathic and herbal therapies were found to be: Rs.1.51/-billion (USD 14.52/-million), 46.82/-billion (USD 450.19/-million) for depression and Rs.0.14/-billion (Rs.140/-million or USD 1.35/-million) in trauma, respectively. The herbal therapies were proved more effective than allopathic therapies, i.e. 29.85, 11.79 and 4.77 % in cases of common cold, depression and trauma.