Skip to main content

01.12.2014 | Research | Ausgabe 1/2014 Open Access

Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 1/2014

Cost-effectiveness of a universal strategy of brief dietary intervention for primary prevention in primary care: population-based cohort study and Markov model

Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation > Ausgabe 1/2014
Martin C Gulliford, Nawaraj Bhattarai, Judith Charlton, Caroline Rudisill
Wichtige Hinweise

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.​1186/​1478-7547-12-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors’ contributions

CR and MCG designed the study; NB completed the systematic review that informed the analysis and wrote the first draft of the paper; JC programmed the Model and analysed the CPRD data; MCG implemented and analysed the simulations; CR contributed all health economic evaluation expertise; all authors critiqued and approved the final version of the manuscript.



A healthy diet is associated with reduced risk of diabetes, cardiovascular disease and cancer. The study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a universal strategy to promote healthy diet through brief intervention in primary care.


The research was informed by a systematic review of randomised trials which found that brief interventions in primary care may be associated with a 0.5 portion per day increase in fruit and vegetable consumption. A Markov model that included five long-term conditions (diabetes, coronary heart disease, stroke, colorectal cancer and depression) was developed. Empirical data from a large cohort of United Kingdom-based participants sampled from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink populated the model. Simulations compared an intervention promoting healthy diet over 5 years in healthy adults, and standard care in which there was no intervention. The annual cost of intervention, in the base case, was one family practice consultation per participant year. Health service costs were included and the model adopted a lifetime perspective. The primary outcome was net health benefit in quality adjusted life years (QALYs).


A cohort of 262,704 healthy participants entered the model. Intervention was associated with an increase in life years lived free from physical disease of 41.9 (95% confidence interval -17.4 to 101.0) per 1,000 participants entering the model (probability of increase 88.0%). New incidences of disease states were reduced by 28.4 (18.7 to 75.8) per 1,000, probability reduced 84.6%. Discounted incremental QALYs were 4.3 (-8.8 to 18.0) per 1,000, while incremental costs were £139,755 (£60,466 to 220,059) per 1,000. Net health benefits at £30,000 per QALY were -0.32 (-13.8 to 13.5) QALYs per 1,000 participants (probability cost-effective 47.9%). When the intervention was restricted to adults aged 50 to 74 years, net health benefits were 2.94 (-21.3 to 26.4) QALYs per 1000, probability increased 59.0%.


A universal strategy to promote healthy diet through brief intervention in primary care is unlikely to be cost-effective, even when delivered at low unit cost. A targeted strategy aimed at older individuals at higher risk of disease might be more cost-effective. More effective dietary change interventions are needed.
Über diesen Artikel

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2014

Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 1/2014 Zur Ausgabe