Cost-Effectiveness of Structured Lifestyle Intervention in Overweight and Obese Adults with Type 2 Diabetes—Results from the Action for Health in Diabetes (Look AHEAD) Study

Diabetes ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 67 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 171-OR
Author(s):  
PING ZHANG ◽  
HAIYING CHEN ◽  
MARK ESPELAND ◽  
RENA R. WING ◽  
MARIA G. MONTEZ ◽  
...  
Diabetes Care ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ping Zhang ◽  
Karen M. Atkinson ◽  
George A. Bray ◽  
Haiying Chen ◽  
Jeanne M. Clark ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ping Zhang ◽  
Karen M. Atkinson ◽  
George Bray ◽  
Haiying Chen ◽  
Jeanne M. Clark ◽  
...  

<b>OBJECTIVE </b>To assess the cost-effectiveness (CE) of an intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) compared to 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. <p><b>RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS</b> Data were from 4,827 participants during the first 9 years of the study from 2001 to 2012. Information on Health Utility Index-2 and -3, SF-6D, and Feeling Thermometer [FT]), cost of delivering the interventions, and health expenditures were collected during the study. CE was measured by incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Future costs and QALYs were discounted at 3% annually. Costs were in 2012 US dollars. </p> <p><b>RESULTS </b><a>Over the </a>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 0.17 and 0.16, 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. </p> <p><b>Conclusions </b>Whether<b> </b>ILI was cost-effective over the 9-year period is unclear because different health utility measures led to different conclusions. </p>


Obesity ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 944-950 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Maria Belalcazar ◽  
Steven M. Haffner ◽  
Wei Lang ◽  
Ron C. Hoogeveen ◽  
Julia Rushing ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael P. Bancks ◽  
Haiying Chen ◽  
Ashok Balasubramanyam ◽  
Alain G. Bertoni ◽  
Mark A. Espeland ◽  
...  

<b>Objective:</b> We re-evaluated the Action for Health in Diabetes (Look AHEAD) intervention, incorporating diabetes subgroups, to identify whether intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) is associated with differential risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD) by diabetes subgroup. <p><b>Research Design and Methods: </b>Look AHEAD randomized 5145 participants, aged 45-76 years, with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and overweight or obesity, to 10 years of ILI or a control condition of diabetes support and education. ILI focused on weight loss through decreased caloric intake and increased physical activity. To characterize diabetes subgroups, we applied k-means clustering to data for age of diabetes diagnosis, body mass index, waist circumference, and glycated hemoglobin. We examined whether relative intervention effects on the trial’s prespecified CVD outcomes varied among diabetes subgroups.</p> <p><b>Results:</b> We characterized four subgroups related to older age at diabetes onset (42% of sample), poor glycemic control (14%), severe obesity (24%), and younger age at onset (20%). We observed interactions (all p<0.05) between intervention and diabetes subgroup for three separate composite cardiovascular outcomes. Randomization to ILI was associated with increased risk for each cardiovascular outcome only among the poor glucose control subgroup (hazard ratios, HR >1.32). Among the three other diabetes subgroups, ILI was not associated with increased risk for CVD.</p> <p><b>Conclusion:</b> Among overweight and obese adults with T2D, a lifestyle intervention was associated with differential risk for CVD that was dependent on diabetes subgroup. Diabetes subgroups may be important to identify the patients who would achieve benefit and avoid harm from an intensive lifestyle intervention.</p>


2017 ◽  
Vol 73 (11) ◽  
pp. 1552-1559 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denise K Houston ◽  
Rebecca H Neiberg ◽  
Michael E Miller ◽  
James O Hill ◽  
John M Jakicic ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (7) ◽  
pp. 1139-1144 ◽  
Author(s):  
John M. Wentworth ◽  
Kim M. Dalziel ◽  
Paul E. O'Brien ◽  
Paul Burton ◽  
Frackson Shaba ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document