The cost of intervention per participant delivered by dietitians was lower than interventions delivered by non-dietitians , although few studies reported costs .
Lifestyle interventions are effective in reducing body weight and glucose-related outcomes .
Dietitian-delivered interventions , compared with those delivered by other personnel , achieved greater weight reduction .
No consistent trend was identified across different delivery channels
BACKGROUND Type 2 diabetes is a significant public health concern .
With the completion of the Diabetes Prevention Program , there has been a proliferation of studies attempting to translate this evidence base into practice .
However , the cost , effectiveness , and cost-effectiveness of these adapted interventions is unknown .
OBJECTIVE The purpose of this systematic review was to conduct a comprehensive meta- analysis to synthesize the effectiveness , cost , and cost-effectiveness of lifestyle diabetes prevention interventions and compare effects by intervention delivery agent ( dietitian vs non-dietitian ) and channel ( in-person vs technology-delivered ) .
Long-term nutrition education reduces several risk factors for type 2 diabetes mellitus in Brazilians with impaired glucose tolerance.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of a nutrition education program ( NEP ) on anthropometric , dietetic , and metabolic parameters in high-risk subjects for type 2 diabetes mellitus . Fifty-one participants , both sexes , were r and omly assigned to either the control ( 58.8 % ) or the intervention ( NEP ) group . The intervention group received frequent individual and group nutritional counseling from a team of nutritionists . Participants were assessed at baseline ( M0 ) and after 12 months ( M1 ) for anthropometric , dietetic , and metabolic parameters . The hypothesis was that high-risk subjects for type 2 diabetes mellitus participating in NEP would show an improvement in these parameters . At M1 , the intervention group showed a significant decline in body weight ( -3.4 % ) , body mass index ( -5.7 % ) , cholesterol intake ( -49.5 % ) , fasting glycemia ( -14.0 % ) , fasting insulin ( -9.0 % ) , postpr and ial glycemia ( -21.0 % ) , postpr and ial insulin ( -71.0 % ) , total serum cholesterol ( -23.0 % ) , and glycated hemoglobin ( -24.0 % ) . A decrease in energy intake ( 5 % , P = .06 ) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ( 25 % , P = .07 ) was observed in the interventional group , although it did not reach statistical significance . In contrast , the control group presented a significantly higher energy intake ( 19 % , P = .04 ) and a nonsignificant increase in consumption of all macronutrients . The long-term NEP was found to improve anthropometric , dietary , and metabolic parameters in high-risk subjects for type 2 diabetes mellitus
The cost of intervention per participant delivered by dietitians was lower than interventions delivered by non-dietitians , although few studies reported costs .
Lifestyle interventions are effective in reducing body weight and glucose-related outcomes .
Dietitian-delivered interventions , compared with those delivered by other personnel , achieved greater weight reduction .
No consistent trend was identified across different delivery channels
BACKGROUND Type 2 diabetes is a significant public health concern .
With the completion of the Diabetes Prevention Program , there has been a proliferation of studies attempting to translate this evidence base into practice .
However , the cost , effectiveness , and cost-effectiveness of these adapted interventions is unknown .
OBJECTIVE The purpose of this systematic review was to conduct a comprehensive meta- analysis to synthesize the effectiveness , cost , and cost-effectiveness of lifestyle diabetes prevention interventions and compare effects by intervention delivery agent ( dietitian vs non-dietitian ) and channel ( in-person vs technology-delivered ) .