Modelled Distributional Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Childhood Obesity Interventions: A Demonstration

被引:0
|
作者
Killedar, Anagha [1 ]
Lung, Thomas [2 ,4 ]
Taylor, Rachael W. [3 ]
Hayes, Alison [4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sydney, Fac Med & Hlth, Menzies Ctr Hlth Policy & Econ, Sch Publ Hlth, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
[2] Univ New South Wales, George Inst Global Hlth, Sydney, NSW 2042, Australia
[3] Univ Otago, Dept Med, Dunedin, New Zealand
[4] Univ Sydney, Fac Med & Hlth, Sch Publ Hlth, Sydney, Australia
基金
澳大利亚国家健康与医学研究理事会; 英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED-TRIAL; QUALITY-OF-LIFE; SOCIAL INEQUALITIES; HEALTH; PREVENTION; OVERWEIGHT;
D O I
10.1007/s40258-023-00813-9
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
ObjectiveTo demonstrate how distributional cost-effectiveness analyses of childhood obesity interventions could be conducted and presented for decision makers.MethodsWe conducted modelled distributional cost-effectiveness analyses of three obesity interventions in children: an infant sleep intervention (POI-Sleep), a combined infant sleep, food, activity and breastfeeding intervention (POI-Combo) and a clinician-led treatment for primary school-aged children with overweight and obesity (High Five for Kids). For each intervention, costs and socioeconomic position (SEP)-specific effect sizes were applied to an Australian child cohort (n = 4898). Using a purpose-built microsimulation model we simulated SEP-specific body mass index (BMI) trajectories, healthcare costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) from age 4 to 17 years for control and intervention cohorts. We examined the distribution of each health outcome across SEP and determined the net health benefit and equity impact accounting for opportunity costs and uncertainty due to individual-level heterogeneity. Finally, we conducted scenario analyses to test the effect of assumptions about health system marginal productivity, the distribution of opportunity costs and SEP-specific effect sizes. The results of the primary analyses, uncertainty analyses and scenario analyses were presented on an efficiency-equity impact plane.ResultsAccounting for uncertainty, POI-Sleep and High Five for Kids were found to be 'win-win' interventions, with a 67% and 100% probability, respectively, of generating a net health benefit and positive equity impact compared with control. POI-Combo was found to be a 'lose-lose' intervention, with a 91% probability of producing a net health loss and a negative equity impact compared with control. Scenario analyses indicated that SEP-specific effect sizes were highly influential on equity impact estimates for POI-Combo and High Five for Kids, while health system marginal productivity and opportunity cost distribution assumptions primarily influenced the net health benefit and equity impact of POI-Combo.ConclusionsThese analyses demonstrated that distributional cost-effectiveness analyses using a fit-for-purpose model are appropriate for differentiating and communicating the efficiency and equity impacts of childhood obesity interventions.
引用
收藏
页码:615 / 625
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Breast Cancer Control Interventions in Peru
    Zelle, Sten G.
    Vidaurre, Tatiana
    Abugattas, Julio E.
    Manrique, Javier E.
    Sarria, Gustavo
    Jeronimo, Jose
    Seinfeld, Janice N.
    Lauer, Jeremy A.
    Sepulveda, Cecilia R.
    Venegas, Diego
    Baltussen, Rob
    PLOS ONE, 2013, 8 (12):
  • [32] Cost-effectiveness analysis of education and health interventions in developing countries
    McEwan, Patrick J.
    JOURNAL OF DEVELOPMENT EFFECTIVENESS, 2012, 4 (02) : 189 - 213
  • [33] Cost-Effectiveness of Antiobesity Drugs for Adolescents With Severe Obesity
    Mital, Shweta
    Nguyen, Hai V.
    JAMA NETWORK OPEN, 2023, 6 (10) : E2336400
  • [34] Cost-Effectiveness of Semaglutide in Patients With Obesity and Cardiovascular Disease
    Rennert-May, Elissa
    Manns, Braden
    Clement, Fiona
    Spackman, Eldon
    Collister, David
    Sumner, Glen
    Leal, Jenine
    Miller, Robert J. H.
    Chew, Derek S.
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 2025, 41 (01) : 128 - 136
  • [35] Limiting Television to Reduce Childhood Obesity: Cost-Effectiveness of Five Population Strategies
    Kenney, Erica L.
    Mozaffarian, Rebecca S.
    Long, Michael W.
    Barrett, Jessica L.
    Cradock, Angie L.
    Giles, Catherine M.
    Ward, Zachary J.
    Gortmaker, Steven L.
    CHILDHOOD OBESITY, 2021, 17 (07) : 442 - 448
  • [36] Cost-Effectiveness of Nonpharmacologic, Nonsurgical Interventions for Hip and/or Knee Osteoarthritis: Systematic Review
    Pinto, Daniel
    Robertson, M. Clare
    Hansen, Paul
    Abbott, J. Haxby
    VALUE IN HEALTH, 2012, 15 (01) : 1 - 12
  • [37] Cost-effectiveness analysis of bariatric surgery for morbid obesity in Belgium
    Borisenko, Oleg
    Lukyanov, Vasily
    Debergh, Isabelle
    Dillemans, Bruno
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ECONOMICS, 2018, 21 (04) : 365 - 373
  • [38] Magnesium sulphate for fetal neuroprotection: a cost-effectiveness analysis
    Bickford, Celeste D.
    Magee, Laura A.
    Mitton, Craig
    Kruse, Marie
    Synnes, Anne R.
    Sawchuck, Diane
    Basso, Melanie
    Senikas, Vyta M.
    von Dadelszen, Peter
    BMC HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH, 2013, 13
  • [39] Tailored recruitment interventions to improve bowel cancer screening in Arabic and Mandarin speaking groups: Modelled cost-effectiveness
    Lal, Anita
    Mohebi, Mohammadreza
    Wyatt, Kerryann
    Ghosh, Ayesha
    Broun, Kate
    Gao, Lan
    Mccaffrey, Nikki
    PLOS ONE, 2024, 19 (11):
  • [40] Screening and brief intervention for obesity in primary care: cost-effectiveness analysis in the BWeL trial
    Retat, Lise
    Pimpin, Laura
    Webber, Laura
    Jaccard, Abbygail
    Lewis, Amanda
    Tearne, Sarah
    Hood, Kathryn
    Christian-Brown, Anna
    Adab, Peymane
    Begh, Rachna
    Jolly, Kate
    Daley, Amanda
    Farley, Amanda
    Lycett, Deborah
    Nickless, Alecia
    Yu, Ly-Mee
    Jebb, Susan
    Aveyard, Paul
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF OBESITY, 2019, 43 (10) : 2066 - 2075