...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>The Internet Journal of Nutrition and Wellness >Impact and Costs Benefit Comparison of the Healthy Beat Curriculum: CD-ROM versus Live Presentation Formats
【24h】

Impact and Costs Benefit Comparison of the Healthy Beat Curriculum: CD-ROM versus Live Presentation Formats

机译：健康节拍课程的影响和成本效益比较：CD-ROM与现场演示格式

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

In spite of new insights into heart disease and increased availability of multimedia education, the number of programs available through self-paced compact disc (CD) or Web Course Tools is still minimal. Our objective was to create an independent learning course to decrease risks of cardiovascular disease, which would be comparable to traditional live instruction and available through CD or Web Course Tools. Both instructional methods resulted in positive heart healthy outcomes (weight, cholesterol, nutrition knowledge and behavior). Participants (n=118) over 18 years of age were recruited. The cost effectiveness of cardiovascular curriculum in both traditional (live teacher) and self-paced CD format was determined. After initial equipment purchases, The Healthy Beat program can be self sustaining with an enrollment fee of $60 per participant; an inexpensive option for cardiovascular education, which can reduce medication costs, and potentially prevent or lessen the mortality and morbidity of cardiovascular events. Funding Disclosure: The Healthy Beat research and program were funded through a CURI, Community/University Research Initiative grant. Introduction Research concludes that cardiovascular disease, stroke, and hypertension involve significant social costs, and that various education programs to decrease the prevalence would lead to social gains [1]. There is a lack of comprehensive educational programs directed toward reducing cardiovascular disease (CVD) with an emphasis on food portioning skills, cooking skills, low fat cooking techniques, increasing fruits, vegetables and dairy products in the diet, and increasing exercise [23]. The cost of heart disease and stroke in the U.S. was nearly $330 billion in 2002. This was broken down to $199 billion spent on direct medical costs, $31 billion on lost productivity during illness, and $99 billion on loss of future productivity due to premature death. Each year over $33 billion in medical costs and $9 billion in lost productivity due to heart disease, cancer, stroke and diabetes are attributed to diet [4]. The increased cost of cardiovascular diseases and stroke in the U.S. for 2006 was estimated at $403.1 billion. This figure includes health expenditures (direct costs -- including physicians and other professionals, hospital and nursing home services, the cost of medications, home health care and other medical durables) and lost productivity resulting from morbidity and mortality (indirect costs) [4]. The estimated health care savings from utilizing the DASH diet alone was $200 billion over a 5-year cumulative period, with $37.5 billion coming solely from obesity prevention [5]. There are three major types of cost analysis, and all necessitate a pre-determined factor of intervention effectiveness measured by change in health status [6]. The most common type is cost-effectiveness analysis, especially in public programs and institutions [78]. The other two are cost-benefit analysis and cost utility analysis. Cost-benefit analyses are very useful, with costs and end-point benefits measured in dollar amounts and reported as a ratio [6]. For the scope of the computations in this study, the costs are calculated in dollars and the end-point benefits are measured by impact on health status and reported in the dollar amount saved per participant. This provides a comparison of the effectiveness and benefits of alternative education methods (or lack thereof). In a literature search of the cost effectiveness and benefits of intervention programs to reduce heart disease risk factors, most references refer to primary or secondary prevention of CVD and hypertension and not comprehensive education programs.Creating a heart healthy curriculum can be cost effective when compared to short and long term health care costs. Our approach of reporting costs consisted of four major points: 1) Reporting the average cost of initial curriculum and CD development/distribution; 2) Calculating the avera
机译：尽管对心脏病有了新的见识，并且多媒体教育的可用性有所提高，但通过自定进度的光盘（CD）或Web课程工具提供的程序数量仍然很少。我们的目标是创建一个独立的学习课程来降低心血管疾病的风险，这可以与传统的现场指导相媲美，并且可以通过CD或Web课程工具获得。两种教学方法均能带来积极的心脏健康结果（体重，胆固醇，营养知识和行为）。招募了18岁以上的参与者（n = 118）。确定了传统（现场教师）和自定进度CD格式的心血管课程的成本效益。购买了最初的设备后，Healthy Beat程序可以自我维持，每位参与者60美元的报名费;一种便宜的心血管教育选择，可以减少用药成本，并有可能预防或降低心血管事件的死亡率和发病率。资金披露：“健康节拍”研究和计划由CURI，社区/大学研究计划资助。引言研究得出的结论是，心血管疾病，中风和高血压会带来巨大的社会成本，而各种降低患病率的教育计划会带来社会收益[1]。缺乏旨在减少心血管疾病（CVD）的综合教育计划，其重点是食物分配技巧，烹饪技巧，低脂烹饪技巧，饮食中增加水果，蔬菜和奶制品以及增加运动[23]。在2002年，美国心脏病和中风的花费接近3300亿美元。其中直接医疗费用支出为1,990亿美元，疾病期间生产力损失为310亿美元，过早死亡导致未来生产力损失990亿美元。每年由于饮食，心脏病，癌症，中风和糖尿病造成的医疗费用超过330亿美元，生产力损失90亿美元[4]。 2006年，美国因心血管疾病和中风而增加的费用估计为4031亿美元。该数字包括健康支出（直接成本-包括医生和其他专业人员，医院和疗养院服务，药物，家庭保健和其他耐用品的成本）以及由于发病率和死亡率导致的生产力损失（间接成本）[4] 。在5年的累积期内，仅使用DASH饮食估计可节省的医疗费用为2000亿美元，其中375亿美元仅来自预防肥胖[5]。成本分析主要分为三种类型，所有这些类型都需要通过健康状况变化来衡量干预效果的预定因素[6]。最常见的类型是成本效益分析，尤其是在公共计划和机构中[78]。另外两个是成本效益分析和成本效用分析。成本效益分析非常有用，成本和最终收益以美元金额衡量并以比率报告[6]。在本研究的计算范围内，成本以美元计算，终点收益通过对健康状况的影响来衡量，并以每位参与者节省的美元金额报告。这提供了替代教育方法（或缺乏教育方法）的有效性和收益的比较。在关于减少心脏病风险因素的干预计划的成本效益和收益的文献研究中，大多数参考文献都提到了CVD和高血压的一级或二级预防，而不是全面的教育计划。短期和长期医疗保健费用。我们报告成本的方法包括四个要点：1）报告初始课程和CD开发/分发的平均成本; 2）计算平均值

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号