Intervention-only programmes were in general more cost effective than programmes that also included a screening component .
The longer the period evaluated , the more cost-effective interventions appeared .
There was insufficient evidence to answer the question of ( 1 ) whether lifestyle programmes are more cost effective than metformin or ( 2 ) whether low-intensity lifestyle interventions are more cost effective than the more intensive lifestyle programmes that were tested in trials .
OBJECTIVE Explore the cost-effectiveness of lifestyle interventions and metformin in reducing subsequent incidence of type 2 diabetes  , both alone and in combination with a screening programme to identify high-risk individuals .
Delaying progression to type 2 diabetes among high-risk Spanish individuals is feasible in real-life primary healthcare settings using intensive lifestyle intervention
Aims /hypothesisTo assess the feasibility and effectiveness of an active real-life primary care lifestyle intervention in preventing  type 2 diabetes within a high-risk Mediterranean population . Methods A prospect i ve cohort study was performed in the setting of Spanish primary care . White-European individuals without diabetes aged 45–75 years ( n = 2,054 ) were screened using the Finnish Diabetes Risk Score ( FINDRISC ) and a subsequent 2 h OGTT . Where feasible , high-risk individuals who were identified were allocated sequentially to st and ard care , a group-based or an individual level intervention ( intensive reinforced DE-PLAN [ Diabetes in Europe — Prevention using Lifestyle , Physical Activity and Nutritional ] intervention ) . The primary outcome was the development of diabetes according to WHO criteria . Analyses after 4-year follow-up were performed based on the intention-to-treat principle with comparison of st and ard care and the combined intervention groups . Results The st and ard care ( n = 219 ) and intensive intervention ( n = 333 ) groups were comparable in age ( 62.0/62.2 years ) , sex ( 64.4/68.2 % women ) , BMI ( 31.3/31.2 kg/m2 ) , FINDRISC score ( 16.2/15.8 points ) , fasting ( 5.3/5.2 mmol/l ) , 2 h plasma glucose ( 7.1/6.9 mmol/l ) and self-reported interest to make lifestyle changes at baseline . Diabetes was diagnosed in 124 individuals : 63 ( 28.8 % ) in the st and ard care group and 61 ( 18.3 % ) in the intensive intervention group . During a 4.2-year median follow-up , the incidences of diabetes were 7.2 and 4.6 cases per 100 person-years , respectively ( 36.5 % relative risk reduction , p < 0.005 ) . The number of participants needed to be treated by intensive intervention for 4 years to reduce one case of diabetes was 9.5 . Conclusions /interpretationIntensive lifestyle intervention is feasible in a primary care setting and substantially reduces diabetes incidence among high-risk individuals . Clinical trial registration : Clinical Trial.gov NCT01519505 Funding : Commission of the European Communities , Institute of Health Carlos III , Spanish Ministry of Health and Department of Health , Generalitat de Catalunya
Intervention-only programmes were in general more cost effective than programmes that also included a screening component .
The longer the period evaluated , the more cost-effective interventions appeared .
There was insufficient evidence to answer the question of ( 1 ) whether lifestyle programmes are more cost effective than metformin or ( 2 ) whether low-intensity lifestyle interventions are more cost effective than the more intensive lifestyle programmes that were tested in trials .
OBJECTIVE Explore the cost-effectiveness of lifestyle interventions and metformin in reducing subsequent incidence of type 2 diabetes  , both alone and in combination with a screening programme to identify high-risk individuals .