BACKGROUND: As obesity prevalence and health-care costs increase, Health Care providers must prevent and manage obesity cost-effectively. METHODS: Using the 2006 NICE obesity health economic model, a primary care weight management programme (Counterweight) was analysed, evaluating costs and outcomes associated with weight gain for three obesity-related conditions (type 2 diabetes, coronary heart disease, colon cancer). Sensitivity analyses examined different scenarios of weight loss and background (untreated) weight gain. RESULTS: Mean weight changes in Counterweight attenders was -3 kg and -2.3 kg at 12 and 24 months, both 4 kg below the expected 1 kg/year background weight gain. Counterweight delivery cost was pound59.83 per patient entered. Even assuming drop-outs/non-attenders at 12 months (55%) lost no weight and gained at the background rate, Counterweight was 'dominant' (cost-saving) under 'base-case scenario', where 12-month achieved weight loss was entirely regained over the next 2 years, returning to the expected background weight gain of 1 kg/year. Quality-adjusted Life-Year cost was pound2017 where background weight gain was limited to 0.5 kg/year, and pound2651 at 0.3 kg/year. Under a 'best-case scenario', where weights of 12-month-attenders were assumed thereafter to rise at the background rate, 4 kg below non-intervention trajectory (very close to the observed weight change), Counterweight remained 'dominant' with background weight gains 1 kg, 0.5 kg or 0.3 kg/year. CONCLUSION: Weight management for obesity in primary care is highly cost-effective even considering only three clinical consequences. Reduced healthcare resources use could offset the total cost of providing the Counterweight Programme, as well as bringing multiple health and Quality of Life benefits.
BACKGROUND: As obesity prevalence and health-care costs increase, Health Care providers must prevent and manage obesity cost-effectively. METHODS: Using the 2006 NICE obesity health economic model, a primary care weight management programme (Counterweight) was analysed, evaluating costs and outcomes associated with weight gain for three obesity-related conditions (type 2 diabetes, coronary heart disease, colon cancer). Sensitivity analyses examined different scenarios of weight loss and background (untreated) weight gain. RESULTS: Mean weight changes in Counterweight attenders was -3 kg and -2.3 kg at 12 and 24 months, both 4 kg below the expected 1 kg/year background weight gain. Counterweight delivery cost was pound59.83 per patient entered. Even assuming drop-outs/non-attenders at 12 months (55%) lost no weight and gained at the background rate, Counterweight was 'dominant' (cost-saving) under 'base-case scenario', where 12-month achieved weight loss was entirely regained over the next 2 years, returning to the expected background weight gain of 1 kg/year. Quality-adjusted Life-Year cost was pound2017 where background weight gain was limited to 0.5 kg/year, and pound2651 at 0.3 kg/year. Under a 'best-case scenario', where weights of 12-month-attenders were assumed thereafter to rise at the background rate, 4 kg below non-intervention trajectory (very close to the observed weight change), Counterweight remained 'dominant' with background weight gains 1 kg, 0.5 kg or 0.3 kg/year. CONCLUSION: Weight management for obesity in primary care is highly cost-effective even considering only three clinical consequences. Reduced healthcare resources use could offset the total cost of providing the Counterweight Programme, as well as bringing multiple health and Quality of Life benefits.
Authors: Steven L Gortmaker; Boyd A Swinburn; David Levy; Rob Carter; Patricia L Mabry; Diane T Finegood; Terry Huang; Tim Marsh; Marjory L Moodie Journal: Lancet Date: 2011-08-27 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Michael Lean; Naomi Brosnahan; Philip McLoone; Louise McCombie; Anna Bell Higgs; Hazel Ross; Mhairi Mackenzie; Eleanor Grieve; Nick Finer; John Reckless; David Haslam; Billy Sloan; David Morrison Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2013-02 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: Brendan Collins; Simon Capewell; Martin O'Flaherty; Hannah Timpson; Abdul Razzaq; Sylvia Cheater; Robin Ireland; Helen Bromley Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-06-29 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: N R Fuller; H Carter; D Schofield; H Hauner; S A Jebb; S Colagiuri; I D Caterson Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2013-12-04 Impact factor: 5.095
Authors: Mark F Harris; Jane Lloyd; John Litt; Mieke van Driel; Danielle Mazza; Grant Russell; Jane Smith; Chris Del Mar; Elizabeth Denney-Wilson; Sharon Parker; Yordanka Krastev; Upali W Jayasinghe; Richard Taylor; Nick Zwar; Jinty Wilson; Helen Bolger-Harris; Justine Waters Journal: Implement Sci Date: 2013-01-18 Impact factor: 7.327
Authors: Kiran Nanchahal; Tom Power; Elizabeth Holdsworth; Michelle Hession; Annik Sorhaindo; Ulla Griffiths; Joy Townsend; Nicki Thorogood; David Haslam; Anthony Kessel; Shah Ebrahim; Mike Kenward; Andrew Haines Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2012-05-04 Impact factor: 2.692