Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://hdl.handle.net/10216/151470| Author(s): | Barbosa, A Whiting, S Ding, D Brito, J Mendes, R |
| Title: | Economic evaluation of physical activity interventions for type 2 diabetes management: a systematic review |
| Publisher: | Oxford University Press |
| Issue Date: | 2022 |
| Abstract: | Background: Economic evaluation of physical activity interventions has become an important area for policymaking considering the high costs attributable to physical inactivity. However, the evidence for such interventions targeting type 2 diabetes control is scarce. Therefore, the present study aimed to synthesize economic evaluation studies of physical activity interventions for type 2 diabetes management. Methods: A systematic review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 statement (PROSPERO reference number CRD42021231021). An electronic search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and NHS Economic Evaluation Database. Studies were eligible if they included: adults with type 2 diabetes; any physical activity intervention in the community settings; an experimental or quasi-experimental design; and a parameter of economic evaluation [cost analysis of interventions, cost-effectiveness analysis (including cost-utility analysis) and cost-benefit analysis] as an outcome. Results: Ten studies were included in this review: seven were randomized controlled trials and three were quasi-experimental studies. All studies included direct costs, and four also included indirect costs. Four studies demonstrated that physical activity interventions were cost-saving, six studies showed cost-effectiveness, and two studies reported cost-utility. The estimates varied considerably across the studies with different analytical and methodological approaches. Conclusion: Overall, this systematic review found that physical activity interventions are a worth investment for type 2 diabetes management. However, comparability across interventions was limited due to heterogeneity in interventions type, design and delivery, which may explain the differences in the economic measures. © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Public Health Association. |
| DOI: | 10.1093/eurpub/ckac074 |
| URI: | https://hdl.handle.net/10216/151470 |
| Source: | Eur J Public Health. 2022 Aug 26;32(Suppl 1):i56-i66. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckac074. |
| Related Information: | info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/FCT/POR_NORTE/SFRH/BD/136702/2018/PT info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/FCT/6817 - DCRRNI ID/UIDB/04750/2020/PT |
| Document Type: | Artigo em Livro de Atas de Conferência Internacional |
| Rights: | openAccess |
| License: | https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
| Appears in Collections: | ISPUP - Artigo em Livro de Atas de Conferência Internacional |
Files in This Item:
| File | Description | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| barbosa-ejph-2022.pdf | 267.52 kB | Adobe PDF | ![]() View/Open |
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License
