Ambulatory Pediatrics
Volume 8, Issue 5 , Pages 336-341, September 2008

Economic Evaluation of a Primary Care Trial to Reduce Weight Gain in Overweight/Obese Children: The LEAP Trial

From the Department of Pediatrics, Centre for Community Child Health, The University of Melbourne, Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Royal Children's Hospital, Melbourne, Australia (Dr Wake, Dr McCallum, and Ms Gerner); Deakin Health Economics Unit, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia (Ms Gold); and McCaughey Centre, School of Population Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia (Prof Waters)

Received 13 September 2007; accepted 23 June 2008. published online 22 August 2008.

Background

A common policy response to the childhood obesity epidemic is to recommend that primary care physicians screen for and offer counseling to the overweight/obese. As the literature suggests, this approach may be ineffective; it is important to document the opportunity costs incurred by brief primary care obesity interventions that ultimately may not alter body mass index (BMI) trajectory.

Methods

Live, Eat and Play (LEAP) was a randomized controlled trial of a brief secondary prevention intervention delivered by family physicians in 2002–2003 that targeted overweight/mildly obese children aged 5 to 9 years. Primary care utilization was prospectively audited via medical records, and parents reported family resource use by written questionnaire. Outcome measures were BMI (primary) and parent-reported physical activity and dietary habits (secondary) in intervention compared with control children.

Results

The cost of LEAP per intervention family was AU $4094 greater than for control families, mainly due to increased family resources devoted to child physical activity. Total health sector costs were AU $873 per intervention family and AU $64 per control, a difference of AU $809 (P < .001). At 15 months, intervention children did not differ significantly in adjusted BMI or daily physical activity scores compared with the control group, but dietary habits had improved.

Conclusions

This brief intervention resulted in higher costs to families and the health care sector, which could have been devoted to other uses that do create benefits to health and/or family well-being. This has implications for countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia, whose current guidelines recommend routine surveillance and counseling for high child BMI in the primary care sector.

Key Words: cost effectiveness, obesity, primary care, randomized controlled trial, secondary prevention

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1530-1567(08)00159-7

doi:10.1016/j.ambp.2008.06.006

Ambulatory Pediatrics
Volume 8, Issue 5 , Pages 336-341, September 2008