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 ) .
A Community-Based Diabetes Prevention Program
Purpose With growing numbers of people at risk for diabetes and cardiovascular disease , diabetes educators report increasing referrals for intervention in prevention of these conditions . Diabetes educators have expertise in diabetes self-management education ; however , they are generally not prepared for delivery of chronic disease primary prevention . The purpose of this project was to determine if individuals at risk for diabetes who participate in an intervention delivered by trained diabetes educators in existing diabetes self-management education community-based programs can reduce risk factors for diabetes and cardiovascular disease . Methods Diabetes educators in 3 outpatient-hospital programs ( urban , suburban , and rural ) received training and support for implementation of the Group Lifestyle Balance program , an adaptation of the Diabetes Prevention Program lifestyle intervention , from the Diabetes Prevention Support Center of the University of Pittsburgh . Adults with prediabetes and /or the metabolic syndrome were eligible to enroll in the program with physician referral . With use of existing diabetes educator networks , recruitment was completed via on-site physician in-services , informative letters , and e-mail contact as well as participant-directed newspaper advertisement . Results Eighty-one participants enrolled in the study ( 71 women , 10 men ) .  Mean overall weight loss was 11.3 lb ( 5.1 % , P < .001 ) ; in addition , significant decreases were noted in fasting plasma glucose , low-density lipoprotein cholesterol , triglycerides , and blood pressure . Conclusions These results suggest that the Group Lifestyle Balance program delivered by diabetes educators was successful in reducing risk for diabetes and cardiovascular disease in high-risk individuals . Furthermore , diabetes educators , already integrated within the existing health care system , provide yet another re source for delivery of primary prevention programs in the community
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 ) .