• myGriffith
    • Staff portal
    • Contact Us⌄
      • Future student enquiries 1800 677 728
      • Current student enquiries 1800 154 055
      • International enquiries +61 7 3735 6425
      • General enquiries 07 3735 7111
      • Online enquiries
      • Staff phonebook
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Journal articles
    • View Item
    • Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Journal articles
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

  • All of Griffith Research Online
    • Communities & Collections
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • This Collection
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • Statistics

  • Most Popular Items
  • Statistics by Country
  • Most Popular Authors
  • Support

  • Contact us
  • FAQs
  • Admin login

  • Login
  • Cost evaluation of providing evidence-based dietetic services for weight management in adults: In-person versus eHealth delivery

    Author(s)
    Rollo, Megan E
    Burrows, Tracy
    Vincze, Lisa J
    Harvey, Jean
    Collins, Clare E
    Hutchesson, Melinda J
    Griffith University Author(s)
    Vincze, Lisa J.
    Year published
    2018
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    Aim: To compare the theoretical costs of best‐practice weight management delivered by dietitians in a traditional, in‐person setting compared to remote consultations delivered using eHealth technologies. Methods: Using national guidelines, a framework was developed outlining dietitian‐delivered weight management for in‐person and eHealth delivery modes. This framework mapped one‐on‐one patient–dietitian consultations for an adult requiring active management (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) over a one‐year period using both delivery modes. Resources required for both the dietitian and patient to implement each treatment mode were identified, ...
    View more >
    Aim: To compare the theoretical costs of best‐practice weight management delivered by dietitians in a traditional, in‐person setting compared to remote consultations delivered using eHealth technologies. Methods: Using national guidelines, a framework was developed outlining dietitian‐delivered weight management for in‐person and eHealth delivery modes. This framework mapped one‐on‐one patient–dietitian consultations for an adult requiring active management (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) over a one‐year period using both delivery modes. Resources required for both the dietitian and patient to implement each treatment mode were identified, with costs attributed for material, fixed, travel and personnel components. The resource costs were categorised as either establishment or recurring costs associated with the treatment of one patient. Results: Establishment costs were higher for eHealth compared to in‐person costs ($1394.21 vs $90.05). Excluding establishment costs, the total (combined dietitian and patient) cost for one patient receiving best‐practice weight management for 12 months was $560.59 for in‐person delivery, compared to $389.78 for eHealth delivery. Compared to the eHealth mode, a higher proportion of the overall recurring delivery costs was attributed to the patient for the in‐person mode (46.4% and 33.9%, respectively). Conclusions: Although it is initially more expensive to establish an eHealth service mode, the overall reoccurring costs per patient for delivery of best‐practice weight management were lower compared to the in‐person mode. This theoretical cost evaluation establishes preliminary evidence to support alternative obesity management service models using eHealth technologies. Further research is required to determine the feasibility, efficacy and cost‐effectiveness of these models within dietetic practice.
    View less >
    Journal Title
    Nutrition & Dietetics
    Volume
    75
    Issue
    1
    DOI
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1747-0080.12335
    Subject
    Nutrition and Dietetics
    Food Sciences
    Public Health and Health Services
    Publication URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10072/384650
    Collection
    • Journal articles

    Footer

    Disclaimer

    • Privacy policy
    • Copyright matters
    • CRICOS Provider - 00233E

    Tagline

    • Gold Coast
    • Logan
    • Brisbane - Queensland, Australia
    First Peoples of Australia
    • Aboriginal
    • Torres Strait Islander