Australian healthy retail policies in hospital settings - a policy analysis and scoping review of potential impacts on dietary behaviours.

Objectives and importance of study: This study analyses Australian healthy hospital retail policies to identify the similarities and differences in the policies and policy implementation processes. The potential impact of the different policy components on dietary behaviours were examined via a scoping review. STUDY TYPE: Policy analysis and scoping review. METHODS: Healthy retail policy documents and policy implementation guidelines were identified via a grey literature search on Department of Health websites of all Australian jurisdictions. Policy components and policy implementation processes were extracted and analysed for similarities and differences. The potential effectiveness of the different policy components on purchasing and/or dietary behaviour were identified via a scoping review of the academic literature, conducted in March 2023 across seven electronic databases and Google Scholar. The scoping review included studies reporting the impacts of healthy food retail interventions implemented in hospitals. No timeframe restriction was applied for both the grey literature search and the scoping review. RESULTS: All Australian jurisdictions, except Tasmania, have implemented jurisdiction specific healthy retail policies in public hospital settings. There are similarities and difference in the policy components and implementation design across the jurisdictions. Similarities included the policy scope, use of a traffic light system to classify the nutritional healthiness of food and beverages for sale, and the standards used to determine the mix of healthy and unhealthy food availability. These similarities allowed sharing of resources across some jurisdictions. There is limited evaluation of policy impacts on purchase and/or consumption behaviours. Twenty of 27 studies identified via the scoping literature review examined interventions similar to the Australian policies and showed that these policies could result in increased purchase of healthier products among staff and visitors. Key implementation success factors include strong support for the policy from all stakeholders, practical implementation support resources, and impacts on retailer profitability. CONCLUSIONS: The healthy hospital retail policies implemented across Australian jurisdictions could encourage healthier food and beverage purchases among staff and visitors. Evaluation of the policies could facilitate further refinement to enhance effectiveness and translation of learnings to international contexts.

How much is invested in obesity prevention in Australia? An analysis of major research and Federal Government funding, 2013-2022.

Objective and importance of study: Overweight and obesity are the second leading risk factors for death and non-communicable disease in Australia. This study aimed to examine the Australian Federal Government funding landscape for population-level obesity prevention from 2013 to 2022. STUDY TYPE: A retrospective analysis and narrative synthesis of publicly available data on obesity prevention funding from the Federal Government and major federally funded Australian research organisations. METHODS: Searches were conducted of Australian Federal Government Budget documents and funding announcements from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), Australian Research Council (ARC) and Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF). Funding allocations targeting obesity prevention, or the prevention of risk factors associated with obesity, were included. These were determined by the presence of keywords related to obesity, unhealthy diet, physical activity and sedentary behaviour. Data were extracted verbatim, coded and narratively synthesised by funding source. RESULTS: From 2013 to 2022, 186 funding allocations for obesity prevention in Australia were identified, totalling approximately A$778 million. The proportion of funding allocated to obesity prevention compared to the total annual budget of each funding source was relatively low: NHMRC = 1.1%; ARC = 0.2%; MRFF = 0.8%; Federal Government = 0.1% (of health budget). Funding for obesity prevention initiatives fluctuated over time. CONCLUSIONS: Findings underscore the need for strategic and ongoing funding allocation to support obesity prevention research, implementation and sustainment of evidence-based obesity prevention initiatives in Australia.

A systematic review of economic evaluations for opioid misuse, cannabis and illicit drug use prevention.

BACKGROUND: Substance use disorders negatively affect global disease burden. Effective preventive interventions are available, but whether they provide value for money is unclear. AIMS: This review looks at the cost-effectiveness evidence of preventive interventions for cannabis use, opioid misuse and illicit drug use. METHOD: Literature search was undertaken in Medline, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EconLit through EBSCOhost and EMBASE, up to May 2021. Grey literature search was conducted as supplement. Studies included were full economic evaluations or return-on-investment (ROI) analyses for preventing opioid misuse, cannabis and illicit drug use. English-language restriction was used. Outcomes extracted were incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) or ROI ratios, with costs presented in 2019 United States dollars. Quality was assessed with the Drummond checklist. RESULTS: Eleven full economic evaluation studies were identified from 5674 citations, with all studies conducted in high-income countries. Most aimed to prevent opioid misuse (n = 4), cannabis (n = 3) or illicit drug use (n = 5). Modelling was the predominant methodology (n = 7). Five evaluated school-based universal interventions targeting children and adolescents (aged <18 years). Five cost-benefit studies reported cost-savings. One cost-effectiveness and two cost-utility analysis studies supported the cost-effectiveness of interventions, as ICERs fell under prespecified value-for-money thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: There are limited economic evaluations of preventive interventions for opioid misuse, cannabis and illicit drug use. Family-based intervention (ParentCorps), school-based interventions (Social and Emotional Training and Project ALERT) and a doctor's programme to assess patient risk of misusing narcotics ('the Network System to Prevent Doctor-Shopping for Narcotics') show promising cost-effectiveness and warrant consideration.

Interventions to prevent alcohol use: systematic review of economic evaluations.

BACKGROUND: Alcohol use is a leading risk factor for death and disability worldwide. AIMS: We conducted a systematic review on the cost-effectiveness evidence for interventions to prevent alcohol use across the lifespan. METHOD: Electronic databases (EMBASE, Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL and EconLit) were searched for full economic evaluations and return-on-investment studies of alcohol prevention interventions published up to May 2021. The methods and results of included studies were evaluated with narrative synthesis, and study quality was assessed by the Drummond ten-point checklist. RESULTS: A total of 69 studies met the inclusion criteria for a full economic evaluation or return-on-investment study. Most studies targeted adults or a combination of age groups, seven studies comprised children/adolescents and one involved older adults. Half of the studies found that alcohol prevention interventions are cost-saving (i.e. more effective and less costly than the comparator). This was especially true for universal prevention interventions designed to restrict exposure to alcohol through taxation or advertising bans; and selective/indicated prevention interventions, which involve screening with or without brief intervention for at-risk adults. School-based interventions combined with parent/carer interventions were cost-effective in preventing alcohol use among those aged under 18 years. No interventions were cost-effective for preventing alcohol use in older adults. CONCLUSIONS: Alcohol prevention interventions show promising evidence of cost-effectiveness. Further economic analyses are needed to facilitate policy-making in low- and middle-income countries, and among child, adolescent and older adult populations.

Cost-effectiveness of LiveLighter® - a mass media public education campaign for obesity prevention.

BACKGROUND: The Western Australian LiveLighter® program has implemented a series of mass media advertising campaigns that aim to encourage adults to achieve and maintain a healthy weight through healthy behaviours. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of the LiveLighter® campaign in preventing obesity-related ill health in the Western Australian population from the health sector perspective. METHODS: Campaign effectiveness (delivered over 12 months) was estimated from a meta-analysis of two cohort studies that surveyed a representative sample of the Western Australian population aged 25-49 years on discretionary food consumption one month pre- and one month post-campaign. Campaign costs were derived from campaign invoices and interviews with campaign staff. Long-term health (measured in health-adjusted life years (HALYs)) and healthcare cost-savings resulting from reduced obesity-related diseases were modelled over the lifetime of the population using a validated multi-state lifetable Markov model (ACE-Obesity Policy model). All cost and health outcomes were discounted at 7% and presented in 2017 values. Uncertainty analyses were undertaken using Monte-Carlo simulations. RESULTS: The 12-month intervention was estimated to cost approximately A$2.46 million (M) (95% uncertainty interval (UI): 2.26M; 2.67M). The meta-analysis indicated post-campaign weekly reduction in sugary drinks consumption of 0.78 serves (95% UI: 0.57; 1.0) and sweet food of 0.28 serves (95% UI: 0.07; 0.48), which was modelled to result in average weight reduction of 0.58 kilograms (95%UI: 0.31; 0.92), 204 HALYs gained (95%UI: 103; 334), and healthcare cost-savings of A$3.17M (95%UI: A$1.66M; A$5.03M). The mean incremental cost-effectiveness ratio showed that LiveLighter® was dominant (cost-saving and health promoting; 95%UI: dominant; A$7 703 per HALY gained). The intervention remained cost-effective in all sensitivity analyses conducted. CONCLUSION: The LiveLighter® campaign is likely to represent very good value-for-money as an obesity prevention intervention in Western Australia and should be included as part of an evidence-based obesity prevention strategy.

Cost-effectiveness of scaling up a whole-of-community intervention: The Romp & Chomp early childhood obesity prevention intervention.

BACKGROUND: Given the high prevalence of early childhood overweight and obesity, more evidence is required to better understand the cost-effectiveness of community-wide interventions targeting obesity prevention in children aged 0-5 years. OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost-effectiveness of the Romp & Chomp community-wide early childhood obesity prevention intervention if delivered across Australia in 2018 from a funder perspective, against a no-intervention comparator. METHODS: Intervention costs were estimated in 2018 Australian dollars. The annual Early Prevention of Obesity in Childhood micro-simulation model estimated body mass index (BMI) trajectories to age 15 years, based on end of trial data at age 3.5 years. Results from modelled cost-effectiveness analyses were presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs): cost per BMI unit avoided, and cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained at age 15 years. RESULTS: All Australian children aged 0-5 years (n = 1 906 075) would receive the intervention. Total estimated intervention cost and annual cost per participant were AUD178 million and AUD93, respectively, if implemented nationally. The ICERs were AUD1 126 per BMI unit avoided and AUD26 399 per QALY gained (64% probability of being cost-effective measured against a AUD50 000 per QALY threshold). CONCLUSIONS: Romp & Chomp has a fair probability of being cost-effective if delivered at scale.

Protocol for the development of Core Outcome Sets for Early intervention trials to Prevent Obesity in CHildren (COS-EPOCH).

INTRODUCTION: Childhood overweight and obesity is prevalent in the first 5 years of life, and can result in significant health and economic consequences over the lifetime. The outcomes currently measured and reported in randomised controlled trials of early childhood obesity prevention interventions to reduce this burden of obesity are heterogeneous, and measured in a variety of ways. This variability limits the comparability of findings between studies, and contributes to research waste. This protocol presents the methodology for the development of two core outcome sets (COS) for obesity prevention interventions in children aged from 1 to 5 years from a singular development process: (1) a COS for interventions targeting physical activity and sedentary behaviour and (2) a COS for interventions targeting child feeding and dietary intake. Core outcomes related to physical activity and sedentary behaviour in children aged ≤1 year will also be identified to complement an existing COS for early feeding interventions, and provide a broader set of core outcomes in this age range. This will result in a suite of COS useful for measuring and reporting outcomes in early childhood obesity prevention studies, including multicomponent interventions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Development of the COS will follow international best practice guidelines. A scoping review of trial registries will identify commonly reported outcomes and associated measurement instruments. Key stakeholders involved in obesity prevention, including policy-makers/funders, parents, researchers, health practitioners and community and organisational stakeholders will participate in an e-Delphi study and consensus meeting regarding inclusion of outcomes in the COS. Finally, recommended outcome measure instruments will be identified through literature review and group consensus. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Deakin University Human Research Ethics Committee (HEAG-H 231_2020). The COS will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and engagement with key stakeholders.

A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations of Health-Promoting Food Retail-Based Interventions.

BACKGROUND: While the number of retail interventions with impacts on diet- and/or health-related outcomes is increasing, the economic evaluation literature is limited. This review investigated (i) the cost-effectiveness of health-promoting food retail interventions and (ii) key assumptions adopted in these evaluations. METHODS: A systematic review of published academic studies was undertaken (CRD42020153763). Fourteen databases were searched. Eligible studies were identified, analysed, and reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. RESULTS: Eight studies that evaluated 30 retail interventions were included in the review. Common outcomes reported were cost per healthy food item purchased/served or cost per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted. Four studies undertook cost-utility analyses and half of these studies concluded that retail interventions were cost-effective in improving health outcomes. Most studies did not state any assumptions regarding compensatory behaviour (i.e., purchases/consumption of non-intervention foods or food purchases/consumption from non-intervention settings) and presumed that sales data were indicative of consumption. CONCLUSION: The cost-effectiveness of retail-based health-promoting interventions is inconclusive. Future health-promoting retail interventions should regularly include an economic evaluation which addresses key assumptions related to compensatory behaviour and the use of sales data as a proxy for consumption.

The Modelled Population Obesity-Related Health Benefits of Reducing Consumption of Discretionary Foods in Australia.

Over one third of Australians' daily energy intake is from discretionary foods and drinks. While many health promotion efforts seek to limit discretionary food intake, the population health impact of reductions in the consumption of different types of discretionary foods (e.g., sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs), confectionery, sweet biscuits) has not been quantified. This study estimated the potential reductions in body weight, obesity-related disease incidence, and healthcare cost savings associated with consumption of one less serving per week of different discretionary foods. Reductions in the different types of discretionary food were modelled individually to estimate the impact on energy consumption and population body weight by 5-year age and sex groups. It was assumed that one serving of discretionary food each week was replaced with either a serving of fruit or popcorn, and a serving (375 mL) of SSBs was replaced with coffee, tea, or milk. Proportional multi-state multiple-cohort Markov modelling estimated likely resultant health adjusted life years (HALYs) gained and healthcare costs saved over the lifetime of the 2010 Australian population. A reduction of one serving of SSBs (375 mL) had the greatest potential impact in terms of weight reduction, particularly in ages 19-24 years (mean 0.31 kg, 95% UI: 0.23 kg to 0.37 kg) and overall healthcare cost savings of AUD 793.4 million (95% UI: 589.1 M to 976.1 M). A decrease of one serving of sweet biscuits had the second largest potential impact on weight change overall, with healthcare cost savings of $640.7 M (95% CI: $402.6 M to $885.8 M) and the largest potential weight reduction amongst those aged 75 years and over (mean 0.21 kg, 95% UI: 0.14 kg to 0.27 kg). The results demonstrate that small reductions in discretionary food consumption are likely to have substantial health benefits at the population level. Moreover, the study highlights that policy responses to improve population diets may need to be tailored to target different types of foods for different population groups.