N R Fuller1, H Carter2, D Schofield2, H Hauner3, S A Jebb4, S Colagiuri1, I D Caterson1. 1. The Boden Institute, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 2. NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre and School of Public Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 3. Else Kroener-Fresenius-Centre for Nutritional Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany. 4. MRC Human Nutrition Research, Cambridge, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Because of the high prevalence of overweight and obesity, there is a need to identify cost-effective approaches for weight loss in primary care and community settings. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term cost effectiveness of a commercial weight loss programme (Weight Watchers) (CP) compared with standard care (SC), as defined by national guidelines. METHODS: A Markov model was developed to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), expressed as the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) over the lifetime. The probabilities and quality-of-life utilities of outcomes were extrapolated from trial data using estimates from the published literature. A health sector perspective was adopted. RESULTS: Over a patient's lifetime, the CP resulted in an incremental cost saving of AUD 70 per patient, and an incremental 0.03 QALYs gained per patient. As such, the CP was found to be the dominant treatment, being more effective and less costly than SC (95% confidence interval: dominant to 6225 per QALY). Despite the CP delaying the onset of diabetes by ∼10 months, there was no significant difference in the incidence of type 2 diabetes, with the CP achieving <0.1% fewer cases than SC over the lifetime. CONCLUSION: The modelled results suggest that referral to community-based interventions may provide a highly cost-effective approach for those at high risk of weight-related comorbidities.
BACKGROUND: Because of the high prevalence of overweight and obesity, there is a need to identify cost-effective approaches for weight loss in primary care and community settings. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term cost effectiveness of a commercial weight loss programme (Weight Watchers) (CP) compared with standard care (SC), as defined by national guidelines. METHODS: A Markov model was developed to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), expressed as the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) over the lifetime. The probabilities and quality-of-life utilities of outcomes were extrapolated from trial data using estimates from the published literature. A health sector perspective was adopted. RESULTS: Over a patient's lifetime, the CP resulted in an incremental cost saving of AUD 70 per patient, and an incremental 0.03 QALYs gained per patient. As such, the CP was found to be the dominant treatment, being more effective and less costly than SC (95% confidence interval: dominant to 6225 per QALY). Despite the CP delaying the onset of diabetes by ∼10 months, there was no significant difference in the incidence of type 2 diabetes, with the CP achieving <0.1% fewer cases than SC over the lifetime. CONCLUSION: The modelled results suggest that referral to community-based interventions may provide a highly cost-effective approach for those at high risk of weight-related comorbidities.
Authors: A Mueller; C Holzapfel; H Hauner; R D Crosby; S G Engel; B Mühlhans; R L Kolotkin; J E Mitchell; T Horbach; M de Zwaan Journal: Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes Date: 2010-07-23 Impact factor: 2.949
Authors: D J Magliano; J E Shaw; S M Shortreed; W J Nusselder; D Liew; E L M Barr; P Z Zimmet; A Peeters Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2008-09-23 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: William C Knowler; Sarah E Fowler; Richard F Hamman; Costas A Christophi; Heather J Hoffman; Anne T Brenneman; Janet O Brown-Friday; Ronald Goldberg; Elizabeth Venditti; David M Nathan Journal: Lancet Date: 2009-10-29 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Susan A Jebb; Amy L Ahern; Ashley D Olson; Louise M Aston; Christina Holzapfel; Julia Stoll; Ulrike Amann-Gassner; Annie E Simpson; Nicholas R Fuller; Suzanne Pearson; Namson S Lau; Adrian P Mander; Hans Hauner; Ian D Caterson Journal: Lancet Date: 2011-09-07 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Catherine L Keating; John B Dixon; Marjory L Moodie; Anna Peeters; Liliana Bulfone; Dianna J Maglianno; Paul E O'Brien Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2009-01-26 Impact factor: 17.152
Authors: Amy L Ahern; Paul N Aveyard; Jason Cg Halford; Adrian Mander; Lynne Cresswell; Simon R Cohn; Marc Suhrcke; Tim Marsh; Ann M Thomson; Susan A Jebb Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2014-06-18 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Maud Alligier; Romain Barrès; Ellen E Blaak; Yves Boirie; Jildau Bouwman; Paul Brunault; Kristina Campbell; Karine Clément; I Sadaf Farooqi; Nathalie J Farpour-Lambert; Gema Frühbeck; Gijs H Goossens; Jorg Hager; Jason C G Halford; Hans Hauner; David Jacobi; Chantal Julia; Dominique Langin; Andrea Natali; Martin Neovius; Jean Michel Oppert; Uberto Pagotto; Antonio L Palmeira; Helen Roche; Mikael Rydén; André J Scheen; Chantal Simon; Thorkild I A Sorensen; Luc Tappy; Hannele Yki-Järvinen; Olivier Ziegler; Martine Laville Journal: Obes Facts Date: 2020-01-16 Impact factor: 3.942