Randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation of the ‘Families for Health’ programme to reduce obesity in children

Robertson, Wendy and Fleming, Joanna and Kamal, A. and Hamborg, Thomas and Khan, Kamran A and Griffiths, Frances and Stewart-Brown, Sarah and Stallard, Nigel and Petrou, Stavros and Simkiss, Douglas and Harrison, Elizabeth and Kim, Sung Wook and Thorogood, Margaret (2016) Randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation of the ‘Families for Health’ programme to reduce obesity in children. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 102 (5). pp. 416-426. ISSN 0003-9888

[img]
Preview
Text
Robertson et al., 2017_Arch Dis Child.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (1MB)

Abstract

Objective Evaluating effectiveness and costeffectiveness
of ‘Families for Health V20 (FFH) compared
with usual care (UC).
Design Multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT)
(investigators blinded, families unblinded) and economic
evaluation. Stratified randomisation by family; target of
120 families.
Setting Three National Health Service Primary Care
Trusts in West Midlands, England.
Participants Overweight or obese (≥91st or ≥98th
centile body mass index (BMI)) children aged 6–11 years
and their parents/carers, recruited March 2012–February
2014.
Interventions FFH; a 10-week community-based
family programme addressing parenting, lifestyle change
and social and emotional development. UC; usual
support for childhood obesity at each site.
Main outcome measures Primary outcomes were
12-months change in children’s BMI z-score and
incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained
(QALY). Secondary outcomes included changes in
children’s physical activity, fruit and vegetable
consumption and quality of life, parents’ BMI and
mental well-being, family eating/activity, parent-child
relationships and parenting style.
Results 115 families (128 children) were randomised
to FFH (n=56) or UC (n=59). There was no significant
difference in BMI z-score 12-months change (0.114,
95% CI −0.001 to 0.229, p=0.053; p=0.026 in favour
of UC with missing value multiple imputation). One
secondary outcome, change in children’s waist z-score,
was significantly different between groups in favour of
UC (0.15, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.29). Economic evaluation
showed that mean costs were significantly higher for
FFH than UC (£998 vs £548, p<0.001). Mean
incremental cost-effectiveness of FFH was estimated at
£552 175 per QALY.
Conclusions FFH was neither effective nor cost-effective
for the management of obesity compared with UC.
Trial registration number ISRCTN45032201.

Item Type: Article
Subjects: C800 Psychology
Divisions: Faculty of Business, Law and Social Sciences > School of Social Sciences > Dept. Psychology
UoA Collections > UoA 04: Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience
Depositing User: Silvio Aldrovandi
Date Deposited: 19 Jun 2017 13:09
Last Modified: 19 Jun 2017 13:09
URI: http://www.open-access.bcu.ac.uk/id/eprint/4694

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item

Research

In this section...