Methodology of the health economic evaluation of the Feel4Diabetes-study.
Health economics
Intervention
Lifestyle
Type 2 diabetes mellitus
Vulnerable group
Journal
BMC endocrine disorders
ISSN: 1472-6823
Titre abrégé: BMC Endocr Disord
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088676
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 Mar 2020
12 Mar 2020
Historique:
received:
18
11
2019
accepted:
09
12
2019
entrez:
14
3
2020
pubmed:
14
3
2020
medline:
27
11
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The clinical and economic burden of type 2 diabetes mellitus on society is rising. Effective and efficient preventive measures may stop the increasing prevalence, given that type 2 diabetes mellitus is mainly a lifestyle-driven disease. The Feel4Diabetes-study aimed to tackle unhealthy lifestyle (unhealthy diet, lack of physical activity, sedentary behaviour, and excess weight) of families with a child in the first grades of elementary school. These schools were located in regions with a relatively low socio-economic status in Belgium, Bulgaria, Finland, Greece, Hungary and Spain. Special attention was paid to families with a high risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus. The aim of this paper is to describe the detailed methodology of the intervention's cost-effectiveness analysis. Based on the health economic evaluation of the Toybox-study, both a decision analytic part and a Markov model have been designed to assess the long-term (time horizon of 70 year with one-year cycles) intervention's value for money. Data sources used for the calculation of health state incidences, transition probabilities between health states, health state costs, and health state utilities are listed. Intervention-related costs were collected by questionnaires and diaries, and attributed to either all families or high risk families only. The optimal use of limited resources is pivotal. The future results of the health economic evaluation of the Feel4Diabetes-study will contribute to the efficient use of those resources.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The clinical and economic burden of type 2 diabetes mellitus on society is rising. Effective and efficient preventive measures may stop the increasing prevalence, given that type 2 diabetes mellitus is mainly a lifestyle-driven disease. The Feel4Diabetes-study aimed to tackle unhealthy lifestyle (unhealthy diet, lack of physical activity, sedentary behaviour, and excess weight) of families with a child in the first grades of elementary school. These schools were located in regions with a relatively low socio-economic status in Belgium, Bulgaria, Finland, Greece, Hungary and Spain. Special attention was paid to families with a high risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus.
METHODS
METHODS
The aim of this paper is to describe the detailed methodology of the intervention's cost-effectiveness analysis. Based on the health economic evaluation of the Toybox-study, both a decision analytic part and a Markov model have been designed to assess the long-term (time horizon of 70 year with one-year cycles) intervention's value for money. Data sources used for the calculation of health state incidences, transition probabilities between health states, health state costs, and health state utilities are listed. Intervention-related costs were collected by questionnaires and diaries, and attributed to either all families or high risk families only.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The optimal use of limited resources is pivotal. The future results of the health economic evaluation of the Feel4Diabetes-study will contribute to the efficient use of those resources.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32164685
doi: 10.1186/s12902-019-0471-3
pii: 10.1186/s12902-019-0471-3
pmc: PMC7066818
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
14Subventions
Organisme : H2020 European Research Council
ID : 643708
Références
Arch Intern Med. 2004 Jul 12;164(13):1422-6
pubmed: 15249351
Obes Rev. 2014 Aug;15 Suppl 3:5-13
pubmed: 25047374
Int J Cardiol. 2013 Sep 30;168(2):898-903
pubmed: 23201081
BMJ Open. 2016 Feb 24;6(2):e010677
pubmed: 26911589
BMJ. 2012 Jan 15;346:e7492
pubmed: 23321486
Orv Hetil. 2015 Dec 13;156(50):2035-44
pubmed: 26639645
J Diabetes Res. 2016;2016:1219581
pubmed: 26798647
Hellenic J Cardiol. 2008 Jul-Aug;49(4):241-7
pubmed: 18935711
BMC Public Health. 2002 Sep 25;2:24
pubmed: 12323079
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012 Dec;136(3):859-68
pubmed: 23117854
Eur Heart J. 2012 Nov;33(22):2865-72
pubmed: 22843446
BMC Public Health. 2012 Dec 08;12:1060
pubmed: 23216917
Public Health Nutr. 2013 Nov;16(11):2073-82
pubmed: 23031568
Aten Primaria. 2003 May 15;31(8):493-9
pubmed: 12765587
Obes Rev. 2014 Aug;15 Suppl 3:81-9
pubmed: 25047383
Eur Heart J. 2000 Nov;21(21):1750-8
pubmed: 11052839
Eur J Cancer. 2011 May;47(8):1175-85
pubmed: 21257305
Value Health Reg Issues. 2014 Sep;4:53-57
pubmed: 29702807
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013 Sep 13;11:155
pubmed: 24034630
Health Technol Assess. 2014 Feb;18(14):1-128
pubmed: 24576414
Acta Biomed. 2005 Sep;76(2):79-85
pubmed: 16350552
Rev Diabet Stud. 2014 Summer;11(2):181-9
pubmed: 25396406
Pediatrics. 2009 Apr;123(4):e661-7
pubmed: 19336356
Ann Intern Med. 2015 Sep 15;163(6):452-60
pubmed: 26167962
Rev Med Liege. 2005 May-Jun;60(5-6):278-84
pubmed: 16035280
Acta Oncol. 2015 Apr;54(4):454-62
pubmed: 25519708
Lancet. 2011 Aug 27;378(9793):826-37
pubmed: 21872751
Ann Epidemiol. 2015 Mar;25(3):201-7
pubmed: 25511307
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2010 Apr;26(2):163-9
pubmed: 20392319
Lancet. 2006 Mar 11;367(9513):847-58
pubmed: 16530579
Diabetes Care. 2007 Sep;30(9):2258-63
pubmed: 17536076
Circulation. 2007 Jul 31;116(5):480-8
pubmed: 17646581
Qual Life Res. 2006 Oct;15(8):1403-14
pubmed: 16960751
BMC Health Serv Res. 2012 Sep 12;12:315
pubmed: 22970797
Ideggyogy Sz. 2007 Jul 30;60(7-8):311-20
pubmed: 17713112
Scand J Public Health. 2005;33(2):99-106
pubmed: 15823970
Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2017 Jun;128:40-50
pubmed: 28437734
Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2004 Dec;28(12):1569-74
pubmed: 15467774
Diabet Med. 2006 Mar;23(3):299-305
pubmed: 16492214
Annu Rev Public Health. 2015 Mar 18;36:393-415
pubmed: 25785892
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2009 Feb 07;7:11
pubmed: 19200391
Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil. 2007 Dec;14(6):815-24
pubmed: 18043305
BMC Cancer. 2011 May 23;11:192
pubmed: 21605383
Public Health Nutr. 2018 Dec;21(17):3281-3290
pubmed: 30207513
Breast Cancer. 2014 Jul;21(4):442-52
pubmed: 22926507
Int J Epidemiol. 2011 Jun;40(3):804-18
pubmed: 21335614
Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2012;4:135-43
pubmed: 22719213
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2012 Jul 09;10:78
pubmed: 22776102
Eur J Health Econ. 2017 May;18(4):449-458
pubmed: 27084749
Br J Surg. 2013 Oct;100(11):1421-9
pubmed: 24037561
BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2010 Nov 25;10:57
pubmed: 21106115
World J Surg. 2002 Jan;26(1):59-66
pubmed: 11898035
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2013 Oct;11(5):531-42
pubmed: 24078223
Vaccine. 2005 Mar 18;23(17-18):2379-87
pubmed: 15755632
Eur J Neurol. 2006 Jun;13(6):581-98
pubmed: 16796582
Lancet. 2014 Jun 7;383(9933):1973-80
pubmed: 24613026
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2000 Oct;69(4):487-93
pubmed: 10990509
Diabetes Care. 2003 Mar;26(3):725-31
pubmed: 12610029
Eur J Health Econ. 2016 Nov;17(8):1001-1010
pubmed: 26542160
Diabetes. 1965 Apr;14:212-23
pubmed: 14278095
Qual Life Res. 2010 Aug;19(6):853-64
pubmed: 20354795
Br J Surg. 2011 Apr;98(4):565-71; discussion 571-2
pubmed: 21656721
Diabet Med. 2010 Jun;27(6):679-84
pubmed: 20546287
Qual Life Res. 2009 Feb;18(1):87-97
pubmed: 19051058
Nutr Hosp. 2012 Mar-Apr;27(2):456-62
pubmed: 22732968
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2012 Apr;28(2):152-8
pubmed: 22559757
Diabetologia. 2001 Nov;44(11):2077-87
pubmed: 11719840
Acta Neurol Scand. 2016 Jul;134(1):42-8
pubmed: 26392407
Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed). 2012 May;65(5):414-20
pubmed: 22133784
Br J Gen Pract. 2009 Nov;59(568):e353-8
pubmed: 19656444
J Neurol Sci. 2004 Sep 15;224(1-2):49-55
pubmed: 15450771
Med J Aust. 2007 May 7;186(9):458-60
pubmed: 17484707