BACKGROUND: Cost-effectiveness analyses facilitate the allocation of health care resources. The aim of the study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of group treatment, already known to be more effective, with routine counseling in obese children. METHOD: A prospective 6-month intervention assessed family-based group treatment (15 separate sessions for parents and children) and routine counseling (two appointments for children). Children's weights and heights were measured at baseline, at the end of the intervention and at follow up 6 months later, and the changes in weight for height and body mass index standard deviations scores (BMI-SDS) were calculated and used as main outcome measures. The mean costs and effects of the programs were analyzed to produce the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, which is an estimate of the additional costs per 1% decrease in weight for height or 0.1 decrease in BMI-SDS. Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from the perspective of the service provider. RESULTS: At the end of the intervention, group treatment costs were 1.4-fold (non-calculable 6 months later) when counted per 1% weight for height decrease, and 3.5-fold (2.8-fold 6 months later) when counted per 0.1 BMI-SDS decrease. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio estimates were euro 53 when calculated for 1% weight for height decrease, and euro 266 (euro 275 6 months later) when calculated for 0.1 BMI-SDS decrease. CONCLUSIONS: Family-based group treatment is more costly compared with individual routine counseling. Salaries form most of the total costs.
BACKGROUND: Cost-effectiveness analyses facilitate the allocation of health care resources. The aim of the study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of group treatment, already known to be more effective, with routine counseling in obesechildren. METHOD: A prospective 6-month intervention assessed family-based group treatment (15 separate sessions for parents and children) and routine counseling (two appointments for children). Children's weights and heights were measured at baseline, at the end of the intervention and at follow up 6 months later, and the changes in weight for height and body mass index standard deviations scores (BMI-SDS) were calculated and used as main outcome measures. The mean costs and effects of the programs were analyzed to produce the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, which is an estimate of the additional costs per 1% decrease in weight for height or 0.1 decrease in BMI-SDS. Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from the perspective of the service provider. RESULTS: At the end of the intervention, group treatment costs were 1.4-fold (non-calculable 6 months later) when counted per 1% weight for height decrease, and 3.5-fold (2.8-fold 6 months later) when counted per 0.1 BMI-SDS decrease. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio estimates were euro 53 when calculated for 1% weight for height decrease, and euro 266 (euro 275 6 months later) when calculated for 0.1 BMI-SDS decrease. CONCLUSIONS: Family-based group treatment is more costly compared with individual routine counseling. Salaries form most of the total costs.
Authors: Tim Lobstein; Rachel Jackson-Leach; Marjory L Moodie; Kevin D Hall; Steven L Gortmaker; Boyd A Swinburn; W Philip T James; Youfa Wang; Klim McPherson Journal: Lancet Date: 2015-02-19 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Rehana A Salam; Zahra A Padhani; Jai K Das; Amina Y Shaikh; Zahra Hoodbhoy; Sarah Masroor Jeelani; Zohra S Lassi; Zulfiqar A Bhutta Journal: Nutrients Date: 2020-07-24 Impact factor: 5.717
Authors: Emma Mead; Tamara Brown; Karen Rees; Liane B Azevedo; Victoria Whittaker; Dan Jones; Joan Olajide; Giulia M Mainardi; Eva Corpeleijn; Claire O'Malley; Elizabeth Beardsmore; Lena Al-Khudairy; Louise Baur; Maria-Inti Metzendorf; Alessandro Demaio; Louisa J Ells Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2017-06-22
Authors: Davene R Wright; Elsie M Taveras; Matthew W Gillman; Christine M Horan; Katherine H Hohman; Steven L Gortmaker; Lisa A Prosser Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2014-01-29 Impact factor: 2.655