Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
1.
Diabet Med ; 34(8): 1136-1144, 2017 08.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28294392

RESUMEN

AIM: To analyse the cost-effectiveness of different interventions for Type 2 diabetes prevention within a common framework. METHODS: A micro-simulation model was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a range of diabetes prevention interventions including: (1) soft drinks taxation; (2) retail policy in socially deprived areas; (3) workplace intervention; (4) community-based intervention; and (5) screening and intensive lifestyle intervention in individuals with high diabetes risk. Within the model, individuals follow metabolic trajectories (for BMI, cholesterol, systolic blood pressure and glycaemia); individuals may develop diabetes, and some may exhibit complications of diabetes and related disorders, including cardiovascular disease, and eventually die. Lifetime healthcare costs, employment costs and quality-adjusted life-years are collected for each person. RESULTS: All interventions generate more life-years and lifetime quality-adjusted life-years and reduce healthcare spending compared with doing nothing. Screening and intensive lifestyle intervention generates greatest lifetime net benefit (£37) but is costly to implement. In comparison, soft drinks taxation or retail policy generate lower net benefit (£11 and £11) but are cost-saving in a shorter time period, preferentially benefit individuals from deprived backgrounds and reduce employer costs. CONCLUSION: The model enables a wide range of diabetes prevention interventions to be evaluated according to cost-effectiveness, employment and equity impacts over the short and long term, allowing decision-makers to prioritize policies that maximize the expected benefits, as well as fulfilling other policy targets, such as addressing social inequalities.


Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/prevención & control , Dieta Saludable , Política de Salud , Promoción de la Salud/economía , Estilo de Vida Saludable , Modelos Económicos , Calidad de Vida , Bebidas Gaseosas/efectos adversos , Bebidas Gaseosas/economía , Simulación por Computador , Ahorro de Costo , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Costos y Análisis de Costo , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/sangre , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/economía , Dieta Saludable/economía , Inglaterra , Educación en Salud/economía , Encuestas Epidemiológicas , Humanos , Tamizaje Masivo/economía , Características de la Residencia , Impuestos , Lugar de Trabajo
2.
Diabet Med ; 34(5): 632-640, 2017 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28075544

RESUMEN

AIMS: To develop a cost-effectiveness model to compare Type 2 diabetes prevention programmes targeting different at-risk population subgroups with a lifestyle intervention of varying intensity. METHODS: An individual patient simulation model was constructed to simulate the development of diabetes in a representative sample of adults without diabetes from the UK population. The model incorporates trajectories for HbA1c , 2-h glucose, fasting plasma glucose, BMI, systolic blood pressure, total cholesterol and HDL cholesterol. Patients can be diagnosed with diabetes, cardiovascular disease, microvascular complications of diabetes, cancer, osteoarthritis and depression, or can die. The model collects costs and utilities over a lifetime horizon. The perspective is the UK National Health Service and personal social services. We used the model to evaluate the population-wide impact of targeting a lifestyle intervention of varying intensity to six population subgroups defined as high risk for diabetes. RESULTS: The intervention produces 0.0003 to 0.0009 incremental quality-adjusted life years and saves up to £1.04 per person in the general population, depending upon the subgroup targeted. Cost-effectiveness increases with intervention intensity. The most cost-effective options are to target individuals with HbA1c > 42 mmol/mol (6%) or with a high Finnish Diabetes Risk (FINDRISC) probability score (> 0.1). CONCLUSION: The model indicates that diabetes prevention interventions are likely to be cost-effective and may be cost-saving over a lifetime. In the model, the criteria for selecting at-risk individuals differentially impact upon diabetes and cardiovascular disease outcomes, and on the timing of benefits. These findings have implications for deciding who should be targeted for diabetes prevention interventions.


Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/prevención & control , Prevención Primaria , Conducta de Reducción del Riesgo , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/etiología , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/prevención & control , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicaciones , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/economía , Femenino , Promoción de la Salud/economía , Promoción de la Salud/métodos , Humanos , Estilo de Vida , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Prevención Primaria/economía , Prevención Primaria/métodos , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Adulto Joven
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA