Cargando…

Health Benefits and Cost-Effectiveness From Promoting Smartphone Apps for Weight Loss: Multistate Life Table Modeling

BACKGROUND: Obesity is an important risk factor for many chronic diseases. Mobile health interventions such as smartphone apps can potentially provide a convenient low-cost addition to other obesity reduction strategies. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to estimate the impacts on quality-adjusted life-ye...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cleghorn, Christine, Wilson, Nick, Nair, Nisha, Kvizhinadze, Giorgi, Nghiem, Nhung, McLeod, Melissa, Blakely, Tony
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: JMIR Publications 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6350086/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30664471
http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/11118
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Obesity is an important risk factor for many chronic diseases. Mobile health interventions such as smartphone apps can potentially provide a convenient low-cost addition to other obesity reduction strategies. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to estimate the impacts on quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained and health system costs over the remainder of the life span of the New Zealand population (N=4.4 million) for a smartphone app promotion intervention in 1 calendar year (2011) using currently available apps for weight loss. METHODS: The intervention was a national mass media promotion of selected smartphone apps for weight loss compared with no dedicated promotion. A multistate life table model including 14 body mass index–related diseases was used to estimate QALYs gained and health systems costs. A lifetime horizon, 3% discount rate, and health system perspective were used. The proportion of the target population receiving the intervention (1.36%) was calculated using the best evidence for the proportion who have access to smartphones, are likely to see the mass media campaign promoting the app, are likely to download a weight loss app, and are likely to continue using this app. RESULTS: In the base-case model, the smartphone app promotion intervention generated 29 QALYs (95% uncertainty interval, UI: 14-52) and cost the health system US $1.6 million (95% UI: 1.1-2.0 million) with the standard download rate. Under plausible assumptions, QALYs increased to 59 (95% UI: 27-107) and costs decreased to US $1.2 million (95% UI: 0.5-1.8) when standard download rates were doubled. Costs per QALY gained were US $53,600 for the standard download rate and US $20,100 when download rates were doubled. On the basis of a threshold of US $30,000 per QALY, this intervention was cost-effective for Māori when the standard download rates were increased by 50% and also for the total population when download rates were doubled. CONCLUSIONS: In this modeling study, the mass media promotion of a smartphone app for weight loss produced relatively small health gains on a population level and was of borderline cost-effectiveness for the total population. Nevertheless, the scope for this type of intervention may expand with increasing smartphone use, more easy-to-use and effective apps becoming available, and with recommendations to use such apps being integrated into dietary counseling by health workers.