Al Sifri Saud, Aldahash Raed, de Luis Roman Daniel-Antonio, Amin Ahmed, Camprubi-Robles María, Kerr Kirk W, Juusti-Hawkes Alina, Beresniak Ariel
Department of Endocrinology and Diabetes, Alhada Armed Forces Hospital, Taif, Saudi Arabia.
Department of Medicine, Ministry of National Guard-Heath Affairs, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Diabetes Ther. 2024 Jan;15(1):155-164. doi: 10.1007/s13300-023-01495-1. Epub 2023 Oct 27.
Low-calorie diets, high in protein and low in carbohydrates, are commonly recommended for patients with pre-diabetes and type 2 diabetes. The objective of this study was to carry out a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) of a low-calorie versus a standard diet from the perspective of the Saudi Arabian health system.
The CBA compares costs and benefits of the two diet strategies over a 1-year time horizon. Costs included diet and diabetes treatment-related resources while benefits were measured in terms of the costs of diabetes complications avoided. Data on costs and benefits were collected from published literature and subject matter experts. Incremental costs were estimated as the cost difference between low-calorie and standard diet. Incremental benefits were estimated as cost difference from medical complications when following a low-calorie or standard diet. The incremental absolute cost-benefit ratio was calculated to show the difference between the costs and benefits of the low-calorie diet. Incremental relative cost-benefit ratio was calculated to show the cost per dollar of benefit obtained. Monte Carlo simulation modeled variability in outcomes due to variation in costs and uncertainty of diabetes complications.
The 1 year cost of standard diet was US$2515 ± 156 compared to US$2469 ± 107 per patient for a low-calorie diet. Incremental benefit is estimated at US$21,438 ± 7367 per patient. The estimated incremental absolute cost-benefit ratio was US$ - 21,360 establishing that benefits are greater than costs, while the estimated incremental relative cost-benefit ratio is 0.0037, establishing that benefits are 270 times greater than costs.
The low-calorie diet was the dominant strategy compared to the standard diet in modeled scenarios. These findings highlight the importance of a low-calorie diet as part of diabetes management programs for outpatients with type 2 diabetes.
低热量饮食,高蛋白且低碳水化合物,通常被推荐给糖尿病前期和2型糖尿病患者。本研究的目的是从沙特阿拉伯卫生系统的角度对低热量饮食与标准饮食进行成本效益分析(CBA)。
CBA在1年的时间范围内比较两种饮食策略的成本和效益。成本包括饮食和糖尿病治疗相关资源,而效益则通过避免糖尿病并发症的成本来衡量。成本和效益数据从已发表的文献和主题专家处收集。增量成本估计为低热量饮食和标准饮食之间的成本差异。增量效益估计为遵循低热量或标准饮食时医疗并发症的成本差异。计算增量绝对成本效益比以显示低热量饮食的成本和效益之间的差异。计算增量相对成本效益比以显示每获得一美元效益的成本。蒙特卡洛模拟对由于成本变化和糖尿病并发症的不确定性导致的结果变异性进行建模。
标准饮食的1年成本为2515美元±156美元,而低热量饮食每位患者为2469美元±107美元。估计每位患者的增量效益为21438美元±7367美元。估计的增量绝对成本效益比为 - 21360美元,表明效益大于成本,而估计的增量相对成本效益比为0.0037,表明效益比成本大270倍。
在模拟场景中,与标准饮食相比,低热量饮食是主导策略。这些发现凸显了低热量饮食作为2型糖尿病门诊患者糖尿病管理计划一部分的重要性。