Overweight and obesity among young, adult women are increasing problems in Sweden as in many other countries. The postpartum period may be a good opportunity to improve eating habits and lose weight in a sustainable manner. The aim was to make a cost-utility analysis of a dietary behavior modification treatment alongside usual care, compared to usual care alone, among lactating overweight and obese women.
This study was a cost-utility analysis based on a randomized controlled and longitudinal clinical diet intervention. Between 2007-2010, 68 women living in Sweden were, after baseline measurement at 8-12 weeks postpartum, randomly assigned to a 12-week dietary behavior modification treatment or control group. Inclusion criteria were: self-reported pre-pregnancy body mass index (BMI) 25-35 kg/m2, non-smoker, singleton term delivery, birth weight?>?2500 g, intention to breastfeed for 6 mo and no diseases (mother and child). The women in the intervention group received 1.5 hour of individual counseling at study start and 1 hour at follow-up home visits after 6 weeks of intervention, with support through cell phone text messages every two wk. Dietary intervention aimed to reduce dietary intake by 500 kcal/day. The control group received usual care. Weight results have previously been reported. Here we report on analyses carried out during 2012-2013 of cost per quality adjusted life years (QALY), based on the changes in quality of life measured by EQ-5D-3 L and SF-6D. Likelihood of cost-effectiveness was calculated using Net Monetary Benefit method.
Based on conservative assumptions of no remaining effect after 1 year follow-up, the diet intervention was cost-effective. Costs per gained QALY were 8 643 - 9 758 USD. The likelihood for cost-effectiveness, considering a willingness to pay 50 000 USD for a QALY, was 87-93%.
The diet intervention is cost-effective.
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01343238 Registered April 27, 2011.The regional ethics committee in Gothenburg, Sweden, approved the study on November 15, 2006.
Notes
Cites: Epidemiol Rev. 2000;22(2):261-7411218377
Cites: Am J Clin Nutr. 2001 Nov;74(5):579-8411684524
Cites: J Health Econ. 2002 Mar;21(2):271-9211939242
Cites: Ann Behav Med. 2003 Oct;26(2):149-5914534032
Cites: Health Econ. 2004 Sep;13(9):873-8415362179
Cites: Health Policy. 1990 Dec;16(3):199-20810109801