R Sagarra1, B Costa2, J J Cabré1, O Solà-Morales3, F Barrio1. 1. Institut Universitari d'Investigació en Atenció Primària (IDIAP) Jordi Gol, Grupo de Investigación en Diabetes Reus-Tarragona, Institut Català de la Salut, Reus, Tarragona, España. 2. Institut Universitari d'Investigació en Atenció Primària (IDIAP) Jordi Gol, Grupo de Investigación en Diabetes Reus-Tarragona, Institut Català de la Salut, Reus, Tarragona, España. Electronic address: costaber@gmail.com. 3. Institut d'Investigació Sanitària Pere Virgili (IISPV), Reus, Tarragona, España; Agència d'Informació, Avaluació i Qualitat en Salut (AIAQS), Generalitat de Catalunya, Barcelona, España.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Transferring the results from clinical trials on type 2 diabetes prevention is the objective of the Diabetes in Europe-Prevention using Lifestyle, Physical Activity and Nutritional intervention (DE-PLAN) project in Catalonia, whose cost-effectiveness analysis is now presented. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective cohort study was performed in primary care involving individuals without diagnosed diabetes aged 45-75 years (n=2054) screened using the questionnaire Finnish Diabetes Risk Score (FINDRISC) and a subsequent oral glucose tolerance test. Where feasible, high-risk individuals who were identified (n=552) were allocated sequentially to standard care (n=219), a group-based (n=230) or an individual-level (n=103) intensive (structured programme of six hours using specific teaching techniques) lifestyle intervention (n=333). The primary outcome was the development of diabetes (WHO). We evaluated the cost of resources used with comparison of standard care and the intervention groups in terms of effectiveness and quality of life (15D questionnaire). RESULTS: After 4.2-year median follow-up, the cumulative incidences were 18.3% (14.3-22.9%) in the intensive intervention group and 28.8% (22.9-35.3%) in the standard care group (36.5% relative-risk-reduction). The corresponding 4-year HR was 0.64 (0.47-0.87; P<.004). The incremental cost induced by intensive intervention compared with the standard was 106€ per participant in the individual level and 10€ in the group-based intervention representing 746€ and 108€ per averted case of diabetes, respectively. The estimated incremental cost-utility ratio was 3243€ per quality-adjusted life-years gained. CONCLUSION: The intensive lifestyle intervention delayed the development of diabetes and was efficient in economic analysis.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Transferring the results from clinical trials on type 2 diabetes prevention is the objective of the Diabetes in Europe-Prevention using Lifestyle, Physical Activity and Nutritional intervention (DE-PLAN) project in Catalonia, whose cost-effectiveness analysis is now presented. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective cohort study was performed in primary care involving individuals without diagnosed diabetes aged 45-75 years (n=2054) screened using the questionnaire Finnish Diabetes Risk Score (FINDRISC) and a subsequent oral glucose tolerance test. Where feasible, high-risk individuals who were identified (n=552) were allocated sequentially to standard care (n=219), a group-based (n=230) or an individual-level (n=103) intensive (structured programme of six hours using specific teaching techniques) lifestyle intervention (n=333). The primary outcome was the development of diabetes (WHO). We evaluated the cost of resources used with comparison of standard care and the intervention groups in terms of effectiveness and quality of life (15D questionnaire). RESULTS: After 4.2-year median follow-up, the cumulative incidences were 18.3% (14.3-22.9%) in the intensive intervention group and 28.8% (22.9-35.3%) in the standard care group (36.5% relative-risk-reduction). The corresponding 4-year HR was 0.64 (0.47-0.87; P<.004). The incremental cost induced by intensive intervention compared with the standard was 106€ per participant in the individual level and 10€ in the group-based intervention representing 746€ and 108€ per averted case of diabetes, respectively. The estimated incremental cost-utility ratio was 3243€ per quality-adjusted life-years gained. CONCLUSION: The intensive lifestyle intervention delayed the development of diabetes and was efficient in economic analysis.
Authors: Rui Li; Shuli Qu; Ping Zhang; Sajal Chattopadhyay; Edward W Gregg; Ann Albright; David Hopkins; Nicolaas P Pronk Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2015-09-15 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Carolina Lapena; Enriqueta Borràs; Clarisa Digon; Rosa Aznar; Jose Luis Del Val Garcia; Esmeralda Castelblanco; Ana Garaikoetxea; Vicencia Laguna Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-06-23 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Francisco Javier Domínguez-Muñoz; José Carmelo Adsuar; Jorge Carlos-Vivas; Santos Villafaina; Miguel Angel Garcia-Gordillo; Miguel Ángel Hernández-Mocholi; Daniel Collado-Mateo; Narcis Gusi Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-03-19 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Francisco Javier Domínguez-Muñoz; Jorge Carlos-Vivas; Santos Villafaina; Miguel A García-Gordillo; Miguel Ángel Hernández-Mocholi; Daniel Collado-Mateo; Narcis Gusi; José C Adsuar Journal: Biology (Basel) Date: 2021-03-22