No abstract

IntroductionLimited evidence exists on the cost-effectiveness of interventions to prevent obesity and promote healthy body image in adolescents. The SHINE (Supporting Healthy Image, Nutrition and Exercise) study is a cluster randomised control trial (cRCT) aiming to deliver universal education about healthy nutrition and physical activity to adolescents, as well as targeted advice to young people with body image concerns who are at risk of developing disordered eating behaviours. This paper describes the methods for the economic evaluation of the SHINE cRCT, to determine whether the intervention is cost-effective as an obesity prevention measure.Methods and analysisA public payer perspective will be adopted, with intervention costs collected prospectively. Within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) and cost-utility analysis (CUA) will quantify the incremental costs and health gains of the intervention as compared with usual practice (ie, teacher-delivered curriculum). CEA will present results as cost per body mass index unit saved. CUA will present results as cost per quality-adjusted life year gained. A modelled CUA will extend the target population, time horizon and decision context to provide valuable information to policymakers on the potential for incremental cost offsets attributable to disease prevention arising from intervention. Intervention costs and effects will be extrapolated to the population of Australian adolescents in Grade 7 of secondary school (approximate age 13 years) and modelled over the cohort’s lifetime. Modelled CUA results will be presented as health-adjusted life years saved and healthcare cost-savings of diseases averted. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios will be calculated as the difference in costs between the intervention and comparator divided by the difference in benefit. Semi-structured interviews with key intervention stakeholders will explore the potential impact of scalability on cost-effectiveness. These data will be thematically analysed to inform sensitivity analysis of the base case economic evaluation, such that cost-effectiveness evidence is reflective of the potential for scalability.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was obtained from the Deakin University Human Research Ethics Committee (#2017–269) and the Victorian Department of Education and Training (#2018_003630). Study findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed academic papers and participating schools will receive annual reports over the 3 years of data collection.Trial registration numberACTRN 12618000330246; Pre-results.

Background Advances in medicine have improved the chances of survival following burn injuries, however, psychosocial outcomes have not seen the same improvement, and burn injuries can be distressing for both the child or young person, negatively affecting their wellbeing. Pediatric burn patients are at a higher risk of developing psychopathology compared to the general population. In order to promote resilience and prevent psychopathology post-burn injury for pediatric burn patients, it is crucial to understand the experience of children and young people after a burn. This study aimed to understand the psychosocial impact that a pediatric burn has as perceived by the pediatric burn patient. Methods Seven pediatric burn patients were interviewed from the Perth Metropolitan area on average 3.1 years after their injury. All participants had been admitted to hospital for their acute injury and stayed for a median length of 2 days in hospital. Interviews with pediatric patients took place online, and the patients were asked about their mental health, coping strategies, changes to lifestyle and supports following their burn injury. The interviews were transcribed and then thematically analysed using an inductive approach. Results Three overarching themes were developed from the interviews: burn-specific impact on the child or young person (including appearance concerns, family factors, and lifestyle factors), the psychological impact (including positive and negative impact on mental health), and factors supporting the recovery journey (including coping strategies and support services). The participants in our study highlighted issues they faced during recovery, the positive and negative impacts of the injury and recovery process and provided suggestions for future opportunities to bolster resilience and promote growth for pediatric burn patients who may face similar challenges in the future. Conclusion Factors that improve the mental health and wellbeing of pediatric burn patients should be promoted, such as mental health and social supports, the promotion of adaptive coping mechanisms, and meeting the needs of the family unit as a whole. Ultimately, the implementation of trauma-focused, family centred interventions is crucial for the psychosocial recovery of pediatric burn survivors.