ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness (CE) of an intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) compared with standard diabetes support and education (DSE) in adults with overweight/obesity and type 2 diabetes, as implemented in the Action for Health in Diabetes study. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Data were from 4,827 participants during their first 9 years of study participation from 2001 to 2012. Information on Health Utilities Index Mark 2 (HUI-2) and HUI-3, Short-Form 6D (SF-6D), and Feeling Thermometer (FT), cost of delivering the interventions, and health expenditures was collected during the study. CE was measured by incremental CE ratios (ICERs) in costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Future costs and QALYs were discounted at 3% annually. Costs were in 2012 U.S. dollars. RESULTS: Over the 9 years studied, the mean cumulative intervention costs and mean cumulative health care expenditures were $11,275 and $64,453 per person for ILI and $887 and $68,174 for DSE. Thus, ILI cost $6,666 more per person than DSE. Additional QALYs gained by ILI were not statistically significant measured by the HUIs and were 0.07 and 0.15, respectively, measured by SF-6D and FT. The ICERs ranged from no health benefit with a higher cost based on HUIs to $96,458/QALY and $43,169/QALY, respectively, based on SF-6D and FT. CONCLUSIONS: Whether ILI was cost-effective over the 9-year period is unclear because different health utility measures led to different conclusions.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Adult , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/therapy , Humans , Life Style , Obesity/therapy , Overweight/therapy , Quality-Adjusted Life YearsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of an intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) on cardiovascular disease (CVD), the Action for Health in Diabetes (Look AHEAD) trial randomized 5,145 participants with type 2 diabetes and overweight/obesity to a ILI or diabetes support and education. Although the primary outcome did not differ between the groups, there was suggestive evidence of heterogeneity for prespecified baseline CVD history subgroups (interaction P = 0.063). Event rates were higher in the ILI group among those with a CVD history (hazard ratio 1.13 [95% CI: 0.90-1.41]) and lower among those without CVD (hazard ratio 0.86 [95% CI: 0.72-1.02]). METHODS: This study conducted post hoc analyses of the rates of the primary composite outcome and components, adjudicated cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and hospitalization for angina, as well as three secondary composite cardiovascular outcomes. RESULTS: Interaction P values for the primary and two secondary composites were similar (0.060-0.064). Of components, the interaction was significant for nonfatal MI (P = 0.035). This interaction was not due to confounding by baseline variables, different intervention responses for weight loss and physical fitness, or hypoglycemic events. In those with a CVD history, statin use was high and similar by group. In those without a CVD history, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels were higher (P = 0.003) and statin use was lower (P ≤ 0.001) in the ILI group. CONCLUSIONS: Intervention response heterogeneity was significant for nonfatal MI. Response heterogeneity may need consideration in a CVD-outcome trial design.
Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases/epidemiology , Life Style , Female , Humans , Male , Middle AgedABSTRACT
Background: Lifestyle interventions have been shown to improve physical function over the short term; however, whether these benefits are sustainable is unknown. The long-term effects of an intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) on physical function were assessed using a randomized post-test design in the Look AHEAD trial. Methods: Overweight and obese (body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m2) middle-aged and older adults (aged 45-76 years at enrollment) with type 2 diabetes enrolled in Look AHEAD, a trial evaluating an ILI designed to achieve weight loss through caloric restriction and increased physical activity compared to diabetes support and education (DSE), underwent standardized assessments of performance-based physical function including a 4- and 400-m walk, lower extremity physical performance (expanded Short Physical Performance Battery, SPPBexp), and grip strength approximately 11 years postrandomization and 1.5 years after the intervention was stopped (n = 3,783). Results: Individuals randomized to ILI had lower odds of slow gait speed (<0.8 m/s) compared to those randomized to DSE (adjusted OR [95% CI]: 0.84 [0.71 to 0.99]). Individuals randomized to ILI also had faster gait speed over 4- and 400-m (adjusted mean difference [95% CI]: 0.019 [0.007 to 0.031] m/s, p = .002, and 0.023 [0.012 to 0.034] m/sec, p < .0001, respectively) and higher SPPBexp scores (0.037 [0.011 to 0.063], p = .005) compared to those randomized to DSE. The intervention effect was slightly larger for SPPBexp scores among older versus younger participants (0.081 [0.038 to 0.124] vs 0.013 [-0.021 to 0.047], p = .01). Conclusions: An intensive lifestyle intervention has modest but significant long-term benefits on physical function in overweight and obese middle-aged and older adults with type 2 diabetes. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00017953.
