Cost-effectiveness of lifestyle counselling as primary prevention of gestational diabetes mellitus: findings from a cluster-randomised trial

Effectiveness of Lifestyle Interventions during Pregnancy on Preventing Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in High-Risk Women: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of Published RCTs

BACKGROUND

Until now, it is uncertain whether lifestyle interventions during pregnancy can prevent gestational diabetes mellites (GDM) in high-risk pregnant women.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims at investigating the effectiveness of dietary interventions and/or exercise interventions during pregnancy for preventing GDM in high-risk pregnant women.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were selected after a search in CENTRAL, Scopus, and PubMed. Synthesis was performed for the outcome of GDM in women with any identified GDM risk factor. Separate meta-analyses (MA) were performed to assess the efficacy of either nutrition or physical activity (PA) interventions or both combined compared with standard prenatal care for preventing GDM. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses, as well as meta-regressions against OR, were performed to assess potentional heterogeneity. Overall quality, the quality of RCTs, and publication bias were also evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 13,524 participants comprising high-risk pregnant women in 41 eligible RCTs were analyzed for GDM. Women receiving only a nutrition intervention during pregnancy were less likely to experience GDM compared with women following standard prenatal care. Among 3109 high-risk pregnant women undergoing only dietary intervention for preventing GDM, 553 (17.8%) developed GDM; however, the result of the MA was marginally not significant (OR 0.73, 95%CI 0.51, 1.03; p-value 0.07), (Q 21.29, p-value 0.01; I2 58% (95%CI 10, 78%)). Subgroup analyses demonstrated an effect for studies that were conducted in Great Britain (OR 0.65, 95%CI 0.49, 0.81; p-value 0.003), and in Spain (OR 0.50, 95%CI 0.27, 0.94; p-value 0.03), for studies with forms of the Mediterranean diet as the intervention's component (OR 0.61; 95%CI 0.46, 0.81; p-value 0.0005), and for studies including a motivation arm in the intervention (OR 0.71, 95%CI 0.58, 0.87; p-value 0.0008). Among 2742 high-risk pregnant women being analyzed for GDM outcome after receiving only an exercise intervention, 461 (16.8%) were diagnosed with GDM. Women after receiving PA intervention were less likely to develop GDM (OR 0.64, 95%CI 0.51, 0.80; p-value < 0.0001), (Q 11.27, p-value 0.51; I2 0% (95%CI 0, 99%)). Finally, 1308 (17%) cases of GDM were diagnosed among 7673 high-risk pregnant women undergoing both diet and PA intervention. Women in the group of mixed lifestyle intervention had a significant reduction in incidence of GDM (OR 0.70, 95%CI 0.55, 0.90; p-value 0.005), (Q 50.32, p-value < 0.0001, I2 66%, (95% CI 44, 79%)).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study support the efficacy of lifestyle interventions during pregnancy for preventing GDM in high-risk women if an exercise component is included in the intervention arm, either alone, or combined with diet. A combined lifestyle intervention including physical exercise and a Mediterranean diet accompanied by motivation support may be considered the most effective way to prevent GDM among high-risk women during pregnancy. Future research is needed to strengthen these findings.

Healthy eating and lifestyle in pregnancy (HELP): a cluster randomised trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a weight management intervention for pregnant women with obesity on weight at 12 months postpartum

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether a weight management intervention for pregnant women with obesity was effective in reducing body mass index (BMI) 12 months after giving birth.

METHODS

Pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) with embedded cost-effectiveness analysis. 598 women with a BMI of ≥30 kg/m2 (between 12 and 20 weeks gestation) were recruited from 20 secondary care maternity units in England and Wales. BMI at 12 months postpartum was the primary outcome. A range of clinical and behavioural secondary outcomes were examined.

INTERVENTIONS

Women attending maternity units randomised to intervention were invited to a weekly weight management group, which combined expertise from a commercial weight loss programme with clinical advice from midwives. Both intervention and control participants received usual care and leaflets on diet and physical activity in pregnancy.

RESULTS

Mean (SD) BMI at 12 months postpartum was 36.0 kg/m2 (5.2) in the control group, and 37.5 kg/m2 (6.7) in the intervention group. After adjustment for baseline BMI, the intervention effect was -0.02 (95% CI -0.04 to 0.01). The intervention group had an improved healthy eating score (3.08, 95% CI 0.16 to 6.00, p < 0.04), improved fibre score (3.22, 1.07 to 5.37, p < 0.01) and lower levels of risky drinking at 12 months postpartum compared to the control group (OR 0.45, 0.27 to 0.74, p < 0.002). The net incremental monetary benefit was not statistically significantly different between arms, although the probability of the intervention being cost-effective was above 60%, at policy-relevant thresholds.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference between groups on the primary outcome of BMI at 12 months. Analyses of secondary outcomes indicated improved healthy eating and lower levels of risky drinking.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN25260464.

Cost Effectiveness of Antenatal Lifestyle Interventions for Preventing Gestational Diabetes and Hypertensive Disease in Pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Lifestyle interventions (diet, physical activity and/or behavioural) to optimise gestational weight gain can prevent adverse maternal outcomes such as gestational diabetes, pre-eclampsia and caesarean section.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to model the cost effectiveness of lifestyle interventions during pregnancy on reducing adverse maternal outcomes.

METHODS

Decision tree modelling was used to determine the cost effectiveness of lifestyle interventions compared with usual care on preventing cases of gestational diabetes and hypertensive disease in pregnancy. Participants were pregnant women receiving routine antenatal care in secondary and tertiary care hospitals. The main outcome measures were cases of gestational diabetes and/or hypertensive disease in pregnancy prevented, costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Analysis was conducted from the perspective of the Australian healthcare system, with a time horizon of early pregnancy to discharge after birth.

RESULTS

Women in the intervention group were 2.25% less likely to have gestational diabetes and/or hypertensive disease in pregnancy (9.53%) compared with the control group (11.78%). Intervention costs were Australian dollars (AUD) 228 per person. Costs were AUD33 per person higher in the intervention group (AUD8281) than the control group (AUD8248). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was AUD1470 per case prevented. Sensitivity analysis showed that base-case results were robust. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, 44.8% of data points fell within the north-east quadrant, and 52.2% in the south-east quadrant (cost saving), with a 95% confidence interval ranging from AUD - 50,018 to 32,779 per case prevented.

CONCLUSIONS

While there is no formally accepted cost-effectiveness threshold for willingness-to-pay to prevent an adverse maternal event, the cost per person receiving a lifestyle intervention compared with controls was close to neutral, and therefore likely to be cost effective. Exploration of the cost effectiveness of different lifestyle delivery modes across various models of antenatal care is now required. Future cost-effectiveness studies should investigate longer time horizons, quality-adjusted life-years and productivity loss.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Not applicable.

Economic benefit of dietetic-nutritional treatment in the multidisciplinary primary care team

Introduction

Chronic diseases and aging are placing an ever increasing burden on healthcare services worldwide. Nutritional counselling is a priority for primary care because it has shown substantial cost savings. This review aims to evaluate the evidence of the cost-effectiveness of nutritional care in primary care provided by health professionals. A literature search was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE between January 2000 and February 2019. The review included thirty-six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews conducted in healthy people and people with obesity, type-2 diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular risk or malnutrition. All the RCTs and reviews showed that nutritional intervention led by dietitians-nutritionists in people with obesity or cardiovascular risk factors was cost-effective. Dietary interventions led by nurses were cost-effective in people who needed to lose weight but not in people at high cardiovascular risk. Some dietary changes led by a primary care team in people with diabetes were cost-effective. Incorporating dietitians-nutritionists into primary care settings, or increasing their presence, would give people access to the healthcare professionals who are best qualified to carry out nutritional treatment, and may be the most cost-effective intervention in terms of health expenditure. Notwithstanding the limitations described, this review suggests that incorporating dietitians-nutritionists into primary health care as part of the multidisciplinary team could be regarded as an investment in health. Even so, more research is required to confirm the conclusions.

Economic Evaluations Informed Exclusively by Real World Data: A Systematic Review

Economic evaluations using Real World Data (RWD) has been increasing in the very recent years, however, this source of information has several advantages and limitations. The aim of this review was to assess the quality of full economic evaluations (EE) developed using RWD. A systematic review was carried out through articles from the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Included were studies that employed RWD for both costs and effectiveness. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Of the 14,011 studies identified, 93 were included. Roughly half of the studies were carried out in a hospital setting. The most frequently assessed illnesses were neoplasms while the most evaluated interventions were pharmacological. The main source of costs and effects of RWD were information systems. The most frequent clinical outcome was survival. Some 47% of studies met at least 80% of CHEERS criteria. Studies were conducted with samples of 100-1000 patients or more, were randomized, and those that reported bias controls were those that fulfilled most CHEERS criteria. In conclusion, fewer than half the studies met 80% of the CHEERS checklist criteria.

Are Lifestyle Interventions to Reduce Excessive Gestational Weight Gain Cost Effective? A Systematic Review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Lifestyle interventions (such as diet and physical activity) successfully limit excessive gestational weight gain and can reduce some adverse maternal events; however, benefit is variable and cost-effectiveness remains unclear. We aimed to review published cost-effectiveness analyses of lifestyle interventions compared with usual care on clinically relevant outcome measures. Five international and six grey-literature databases were searched from 2007 to 2018. Articles were assessed for quality of reporting. Data were extracted from healthcare and societal perspectives. Costs were adapted to the common currencies of Australia and the United Kingdom by adjusting for resource utilization, healthcare purchase price and changes in costs over time. Included studies were economic analyses of lifestyle interventions aiming to limit weight-gain during pregnancy and/or reduce risk of gestational diabetes, for women with a BMI of 25 or greater in pre- or early-pregnancy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Of the 538 articles identified, six were retained for review: one modelling study and five studies in which an economic analysis was performed alongside a randomized-controlled trial. Outcome measures included infant birth-weight, fasting glucose, insulin resistance, gestational weight-gain, infant respiratory distress syndrome, perceived health, cost per case of adverse outcome avoided and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Interventions were cost-effective in only one study. Although many studies have investigated the efficacy of lifestyle interventions in pregnancy, few have included cost-effectiveness analyses. Where cost-effectiveness studies were undertaken, results were inconsistent. Secondary meta-analysis, taxonomy and framework research is now required to determine the effective components of lifestyle interventions and to guide future cost-effectiveness analyses.

Cost-effectiveness of controlling gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Timely screening for hyperglycaemia in pregnancy using a simple glucose test enhances early detection and control of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). The aim of this study was to provide an overview of the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of identification and/or treatment of GDM.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review using three electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane) of cost-effectiveness studies of GDM screening and treatment published during 2000-2017.

RESULTS

The initial search discovered 287 references (PubMed 86, EMBASE 195, Cochrane library 6) of which six full articles were included in the review. Two articles were model-based analysis and the remaining four were trial based. Two studies demonstrated favorable cost-effectiveness of intensified management of mild GDM. In the other included studies, neither screening nor treatment of GDM was shown to be cost effective, although results varied with the particular outcome measures used and the assumptions that where applied.

CONCLUSION

Neither screening nor treating GDM seems to be convincingly cost-effective from the studies reviewed. However, all studies were done in high-income countries with obviously different health systems than low-/middle-income countries (LMIC) have. Since detection of GDM may be relatively poor in LMIC, screening might be more worthwhile in these countries. Comprehensive research is necessary in LMIC, including the potential outcomes of assessing its cost-effectiveness. Favorable cost-effectiveness could help in bridging the need for and access to increased diabetes screening in early pregnancy in these countries.

Effects of antenatal diet and physical activity on maternal and fetal outcomes: individual patient data meta-analysis and health economic evaluation

BACKGROUND

Diet- and physical activity-based interventions in pregnancy have the potential to alter maternal and child outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether or not the effects of diet and lifestyle interventions vary in subgroups of women, based on maternal body mass index (BMI), age, parity, Caucasian ethnicity and underlying medical condition(s), by undertaking an individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis. We also evaluated the association of gestational weight gain (GWG) with adverse pregnancy outcomes and assessed the cost-effectiveness of the interventions.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and Health Technology Assessment database were searched from October 2013 to March 2015 (to update a previous search).

REVIEW METHODS

Researchers from the International Weight Management in Pregnancy Collaborative Network shared the primary data. For each intervention type and outcome, we performed a two-step IPD random-effects meta-analysis, for all women (except underweight) combined and for each subgroup of interest, to obtain summary estimates of effects and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and synthesised the differences in effects between subgroups. In the first stage, we fitted a linear regression adjusted for baseline (for continuous outcomes) or a logistic regression model (for binary outcomes) in each study separately; estimates were combined across studies using random-effects meta-analysis models. We quantified the relationship between weight gain and complications, and undertook a decision-analytic model-based economic evaluation to assess the cost-effectiveness of the interventions.

RESULTS

Diet and lifestyle interventions reduced GWG by an average of 0.70 kg (95% CI -0.92 to -0.48 kg; 33 studies, 9320 women). The effects on composite maternal outcome [summary odds ratio (OR) 0.90, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.03; 24 studies, 8852 women] and composite fetal/neonatal outcome (summary OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.08; 18 studies, 7981 women) were not significant. The effect did not vary with baseline BMI, age, ethnicity, parity or underlying medical conditions for GWG, and composite maternal and fetal outcomes. Lifestyle interventions reduce Caesarean sections (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.99), but not other individual maternal outcomes such as gestational diabetes mellitus (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.10), pre-eclampsia or pregnancy-induced hypertension (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.16) and preterm birth (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.13). There was no significant effect on fetal outcomes. The interventions were not cost-effective. GWG, including adherence to the Institute of Medicine-recommended targets, was not associated with a reduction in complications. Predictors of GWG were maternal age (summary estimate -0.10 kg, 95% CI -0.14 to -0.06 kg) and multiparity (summary estimate -0.73 kg, 95% CI -1.24 to -0.23 kg).

LIMITATIONS

The findings were limited by the lack of standardisation in the components of intervention, residual heterogeneity in effects across studies for most analyses and the unavailability of IPD in some studies.

CONCLUSION

Diet and lifestyle interventions in pregnancy are clinically effective in reducing GWG irrespective of risk factors, with no effects on composite maternal and fetal outcomes.

FUTURE WORK

The differential effects of lifestyle interventions on individual pregnancy outcomes need evaluation.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013003804.

FUNDING

The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Combined diet and exercise interventions for preventing gestational diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with a wide range of adverse health consequences for women and their infants in the short and long term. With an increasing prevalence of GDM worldwide, there is an urgent need to assess strategies for GDM prevention, such as combined diet and exercise interventions. This is an update of a Cochrane review that was first published in 2015.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of diet interventions in combination with exercise interventions for pregnant women for preventing GDM, and associated adverse health consequences for the mother and her infant/child.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (27 November 2016) and reference lists of retrieved studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs, comparing combined diet and exercise interventions with no intervention (i.e. standard care), that reported on GDM diagnosis as an outcome. Quasi-RCTs were excluded. Cross-over trials were not eligible for inclusion. We planned to include RCTs comparing two or more different diet/exercise interventions, however none were identified.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data, assessed the risk of bias of the included trials and assessed quality of evidence for selected maternal and infant/child outcomes using the GRADE approach. We checked data for accuracy.

MAIN RESULTS

In this update, we included 23 RCTs (involving 8918 women and 8709 infants) that compared combined diet and exercise interventions with no intervention (standard care). The studies varied in the diet and exercise programs evaluated and health outcomes reported. None reported receiving funding from a drug manufacturer or agency with interests in the results. Overall risk of bias was judged to be unclear due to the lack of methodological detail reported. Most studies were undertaken in high-income countries.For our primary review outcomes, there was a possible reduced risk of GDM in the diet and exercise intervention group compared with the standard care group (average risk ratio (RR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71 to 1.01; 6633 women; 19 RCTs; Tau² = 0.05; I² = 42%; P = 0.07; moderate-quality evidence). There was also a possible reduced risk of caesarean section (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.02; 6089 women; 14 RCTs; moderate-quality evidence). No clear differences were seen between groups for pre-eclampsia (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.22; 5366 participants; 8 RCTs; low-quality evidence), pregnancy-induced hypertension and/or hypertension (average RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.27; 3073 participants; 6 RCTs; Tau² = 0.19; I² = 62%; very low-quality evidence), perinatal mortality (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.63; 3757 participants; 2 RCTs; low-quality evidence) or large-for-gestational age (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.07; 5353 participants; 11 RCTs; low-quality evidence). No data were reported for infant mortality or morbidity composite.Subgroup analyses (based on trial design, maternal body mass index (BMI) and ethnicity) revealed no clear differential treatment effects. We were unable to assess the impact of maternal age, parity and specific features of the diet and exercise interventions. Findings from sensitivity analyses (based on RCT quality) generally supported those observed in the main analyses. We were not able to perform subgroup analyses based on maternal age, parity or nature of the exercise/dietary interventions due to the paucity of information/data on these characteristics and the inability to meaningfully group intervention characteristics.For most of the secondary review outcomes assessed using GRADE, there were no clear differences between groups, including for perineal trauma (RR 1.27, 95% CI 0.78 to 2.05; 2733 participants; 2 RCTs; moderate-quality evidence), neonatal hypoglycaemia (average RR 1.42, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.98; 3653 participants; 2 RCTs; Tau² = 0.23; I² = 77%; low quality evidence); and childhood adiposity (BMI z score) (MD 0.05, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.40; 794 participants; 2 RCTs; Tau² = 0.04; I² = 59%; low-quality evidence). However, there was evidence of less gestational weight gain in the diet and exercise intervention group compared with the control group (mean difference (MD) -0.89 kg, 95% CI -1.39 to -0.40; 5052 women; 16 RCTs; Tau² = 0.37; I² = 43%;moderate-quality evidence). No data were reported for maternal postnatal depression or type 2 diabetes; childhood/adulthood type 2 diabetes, or neurosensory disability.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-quality evidence suggests reduced risks of GDM and caesarean section with combined diet and exercise interventions during pregnancy as well as reductions in gestational weight gain, compared with standard care. There were no clear differences in hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, perinatal mortality, large-for-gestational age, perineal trauma, neonatal hypoglycaemia, and childhood adiposity (moderate- tovery low-quality evidence).Using GRADE methodology, the evidence was assessed as moderate to very low quality. Downgrading decisions were predominantly due to design limitations (risk of bias), and imprecision (uncertain effect estimates, and at times, small sample sizes and low event rates), however two outcomes (pregnancy-induced hypertension/hypertension and neonatal hypoglycaemia), were also downgraded for unexplained inconsistency (statistical heterogeneity).Due to the variability of the diet and exercise components tested in the included studies, the evidence in this review has limited ability to inform practice. Future studies could describe the interventions used in more detail, if and how these influenced behaviour change and ideally be standardised between studies. Studies could also consider using existing core outcome sets to facilitate more standardised reporting.

"The Burden of Pregnancy"; heavier for the heaviest? The changes in Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) assessed by the 15D instrument during pregnancy and postpartum in different body mass index groups: a longitudinal survey

INTRODUCTION

Only little information is available on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and its changes during the course of a normal pregnancy. We studied changes in HRQoL in a pregnant population during pregnancy and until 1 year postpartum in different body mass index (BMI) groups.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Seven hundred and fifty pregnant women attending the first ultrasound examination before gestational week 14 were invited to participate in a longitudinal, communal-based survey. The participants were divided into three groups according to their BMI; <25, 25-29.9, and ≥30 kg/m² . The women were asked to fill in questionnaires assessing HRQoL (15D), depressive symptoms (Edinburgh Depression Scale, EPDS), medical, obstetric and socioeconomic status at baseline. HRQoL and EPDS were re-assessed at 30 weeks of gestation, and 6 weeks, 3 and 12 months postpartum.

RESULTS

Of the invited 750 mothers, 325 (43%) returned the questionnaires and at least one follow-up questionnaire. At baseline, mean 15D scores decreased with increasing BMI but the difference was not statistically significant when adjusted for age, educational attainment, parity or EPDS-scores (0.929, 0.921 and 0.916, p = 0.16). During the course of pregnancy, the HRQoL of all women decreased but this decrease was significantly greater in the obese group (-0.088; 95% CI -0.110 to -0.065) than in the other groups [-0.054 (95% CI -0.062 to -0.045) and -0.051 (95% CI -0.068 to -0.033), p = 0.019]. Within 3 months postpartum the mean HRQoL recovered in all BMI groups to baseline levels, irrespective of the mode of delivery or pregnancy-related complications.

CONCLUSION

The burden of pregnancy is heavier for the heaviest.

Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of a Cluster-Randomized Prenatal Lifestyle Counseling Trial: A Seven-Year Follow-Up

There is a link between the pregnancy and its long-term influence on health and susceptibility to future chronic disease both in mother and offspring. The objective was to determine whether individual counseling on physical activity and diet and weight gain at five antenatal visits can prevent type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and overweight or improve glycemic parameters, among all at-risk-mothers and their children. Another objective was to evaluate whether gestational lifestyle intervention was cost-effective as measured with mother's sickness absence and quality-adjusted life years (QALY). This study was a seven-year follow-up study for women, who were enrolled to the antenatal cluster-randomized controlled trial (RCT). Analysis of the outcome included all women whose outcome was available, in addition with subgroup analysis including women adherent to all lifestyle aims. A total of 173 women with their children participated to the study, representing 43% (173/399) of the women who finished the original RCT. Main outcome measures were: T2DM based on medication use or fasting blood glucose or oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), body mass index (BMI), glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c). None of the women were diagnosed to have T2DM. HbA1c or fasting blood glucose differences were not found among mothers or children. Differences in BMI were non-significant among mothers (Intervention 27.3, Usual care 28.1 kg/m2, p = 0.33) and children (I 21.3 vs U 22.5 kg/m2, p = 0.07). Children's BMI was significantly lower among adherent group (I 20.5 vs U 22.5, p = 0.04). The mean total cost per person was 30.6% lower in the intervention group than in the usual care group (I €2,944 vs. U €4,243; p = 0.74). Intervention was cost-effective in terms of sickness absence but not in QALY gained i.e. if society is willing to pay additional €100 per one avoided sickness absence day; there is a 90% probability of the intervention arm to be cost-effective. Long-term effectiveness of antenatal lifestyle counseling was not shown, in spite of possible effect on children's BMI. Cost-effectiveness of the intervention in terms of sickness absence may have larger societal impact.

Lifestyle Interventions to Prevent Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluation Studies

Objective. To summarize key findings of economic evaluations of lifestyle interventions for the primary prevention of type 2 diabetes (T2D) in high-risk subjects. Methods. We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed original studies published since January 2009 in English, French, and Spanish. Eligible studies were identified through relevant databases including PubMed, Medline, National Health Services Economic Evaluation, CINHAL, EconLit, Web of sciences, EMBASE, and the Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature. Studies targeting obesity were also included. Data were extracted using a standardized method. The BMJ checklist was used to assess study quality. The heterogeneity of lifestyle interventions precluded a meta-analysis. Results. Overall, 20 studies were retained, including six focusing on obesity control. Seven were conducted within trials and 13 using modeling techniques. T2D prevention by physical activity or diet or both proved cost-effective according to accepted thresholds, except for five inconclusive studies, three on diabetes prevention and two on obesity control. Most studies exhibited limitations in reporting results, primarily with regard to generalizability and justification of selected sensitivity parameters. Conclusion. This confirms that lifestyle interventions for the primary prevention of diabetes are cost-effective. Such interventions should be further promoted as sound investment in the fight against diabetes.