Prescribing smartphone applications for physical activity promotion in primary care: modeling health gain and cost savings (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leah Grout ◽  
Kendra Telfer ◽  
Nick Wilson ◽  
Christine Cleghorn ◽  
Anja Mizdrak

BACKGROUND Inadequate physical activity is a substantial cause of health loss globally with this loss attributable to such diseases as coronary heart disease, diabetes, stroke, and certain forms of cancer. OBJECTIVE We aimed to assess the potential impact of the prescription of smartphone applications (apps) in primary care settings on physical activity levels, health gains (in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)), and health system costs in New Zealand (NZ). METHODS A proportional multistate lifetable model was used to estimate the change in physical activity levels and to predict resultant health gains in QALYs and health system costs over the remaining lifespan of the NZ population alive in 2011 at a 3% discount rate. RESULTS The modeled intervention resulted in an estimated 430 QALYs (95% uncertainty interval: 320 to 550), with net cost-savings of NZ $2.2 million (2018 US $1.6 million) over the remaining lifespan of the 2011 NZ population. On a per capita basis, QALY gains were generally larger in women than men, and larger in Māori than non-Māori. The health impact and cost-effectiveness of the intervention were highly sensitive to assumptions around intervention uptake and decay. For example, the scenario analysis with the largest benefits, which assumed a five-year maintenance of additional physical activity levels, delivered 1750 QALYs and NZ $22.5 million in cost-savings. CONCLUSIONS The prescription of smartphone apps for promoting physical activity in primary care settings is likely to generate modest health gains and cost-savings at the population level, in this high-income country. Such gains may increase with ongoing improvements in app design and increased health worker promotion to patients.

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
pp. e002321 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip Erick Wikman-Jorgensen ◽  
Jara Llenas-Garcia ◽  
Jad Shedrawy ◽  
Joaquim Gascon ◽  
Jose Muñoz ◽  
...  

BackgroundThe best strategy for controlling morbidity due to imported strongyloidiasis in migrants is unclear. We evaluate the cost-effectiveness of six possible interventions.MethodsWe developed a stochastic Markov chain model. The target population was adult migrants from endemic countries to the European Union; the time horizon, a lifetime and the perspective, that of the health system. Average and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ACER and ICER) were calculated as 2016 EUR/life-year gained (LYG). Health interventions compared were: base case (no programme), primary care-based presumptive treatment (PCPresTr), primary care-based serological screening and treatment (PCSerTr), hospital-based presumptive treatment (HospPresTr), hospital-based serological screening and treatment (HospSerTr), hospital-based presumptive treatment of immunosuppressed (HospPresTrim) and hospital-based serological screening and treatment of the immunosuppressed (HospSerTrim). The willingness to pay threshold (WTP) was €32 126.95/LYG.ResultsThe base case model yielded a loss of 2 486 708.24 life-years and cost EUR 3 238 393. Other interventions showed the following: PCPresTr: 2 488 095.47 life-years (Δ1 387.23LYG), cost: EUR 8 194 563; ACER: EUR 3573/LYG; PCSerTr: 2 488 085.8 life-years (Δ1377.57LYG), cost: EUR 207 679 077, ACER: EUR 148 407/LYG; HospPresTr: 2 488 046.17 life-years (Δ1337.92LYG), cost: EUR 14 559 575; ACER: EUR 8462/LYG; HospSerTr: 2 488 024.33 life-years (Δ1316.08LYG); cost: EUR 207 734 073; ACER: EUR 155 382/LYG; HospPresTrim: 2 488 093.93 life-years, cost: EUR 1 105 483; ACER: EUR −1539/LYG (cost savings); HospSerTrim: 2 488 073.8 life-years (Δ1365.55LYG), cost: EUR 4 274 239; ACER: EUR 759/LYG. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were undertaken; HospPresTrim remained below WTP for all parameters’ ranges and iterations.ConclusionPresumptively treating all immunosuppressed migrants from areas with endemic Strongyloides would generate cost savings to the health system.


Author(s):  
Kathy Kornas ◽  
Laura C. Rosella ◽  
Ghazal S. Fazli ◽  
Gillian L. Booth

Promoting adequate levels of physical activity in the population is important for diabetes prevention. However, the scale needed to achieve tangible population benefits is unclear. We aimed to estimate the public health impact of increases in walking as a means of diabetes prevention and health care cost savings attributable to diabetes. We applied the validated Diabetes Population Risk Tool (DPoRT) to the 2015/16 Canadian Community Health Survey for adults aged 18–64, living in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton area, Ontario, Canada. DPoRT was used to generate three population-level scenarios involving increases in walking among individuals with low physical activity levels, low daily step counts and high dependency on non-active forms of travel, compared to a baseline scenario (no change in walking rates). We estimated number of diabetes cases prevented and health care costs saved in each scenario compared with the baseline. Each of the three scenarios predicted a considerable reduction in diabetes and related health care cost savings. In order of impact, the largest population benefits were predicted from targeting populations with low physical activity levels, low daily step counts, and non active transport use. Population increases of walking by 25 min each week was predicted to prevent up to 10.4 thousand diabetes cases and generate CAD 74.4 million in health care cost savings in 10 years. Diabetes reductions and cost savings were projected to be higher if increases of 150 min of walking per week could be achieved at the population-level (up to 54.3 thousand diabetes cases prevented and CAD 386.9 million in health care cost savings). Policy, programming, and community designs that achieve modest increases in population walking could translate to meaningful reductions in the diabetes burden and cost savings to the health care system.


BJGP Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. bjgpopen18X101628 ◽  
Author(s):  
Max J Western ◽  
Dylan Thompson ◽  
Oliver J Peacock ◽  
Afroditi Stathi

BackgroundPromotion of physical activity in primary care has had limited success. Wearable technology presents an opportunity to support healthcare practitioners (HCPs) in providing personalised feedback to their patients.AimTo explore the differing thoughts and feelings of both HCPs and at-risk patients provided with personalised multidimensional physical activity feedback.Design & settingQualitative study with HCPs (n = 15) and patients at risk of cardiovascular disease or type 2 diabetes (n = 29), recruited from primary care.MethodHCPs and patients wore a physical activity monitor for 7 days and were subsequently shown their personalised multidimensional feedback, including sedentary time, calorie burn, short (1-minute) or long (>10-minute) bouts of moderate-to-vigorous activity during semi-structured interviews. Transcripts were analysed thematically with comparisons made between individuals of high (n = 21) and low (n = 23) physical activity levels as to their cognitive–affective responses to their data.ResultsPersonalised feedback elicited positive emotional responses for highly active participants and negative emotional responses for those with low activity. However, individuals with low activity demonstrated largely positive coping mechanisms. Some low active participants were in denial over feedback, but the majority valued it as an opportunity to think of ways to improve physical activity (cognitive reappraisal) and started forming action plans (problem-focused coping). Around half of all participants also sought to validate their feedback against peers.ConclusionPersonalised, visual feedback elicits immediate emotional and coping responses in participants of high and low physical activity levels. Further studies should explore whether multidimensional feedback could help practitioners explore diverse ways for lifestyle change with patients.


Author(s):  
Mark Stoutenberg ◽  
Gabriel E. Shaya ◽  
David I. Feldman ◽  
Jennifer K. Carroll

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document