[Are Interventions Promoting Physical Activity Cost-Effective? A Systematic Review of Reviews]

On the basis of international published reviews, this systematic review aims to determine the health economic benefits of interventions promoting physical activity.This review of reviews is based on a systematic literature research in 10 databases (e. g. PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscus) supplemented by hand searches from January 2000 to October 2015. Publications were considered in the English or German language only. Results of identified reviews were derived.In total, 18 reviews were identified that could be attributed to interventions promoting physical activity (2 reviews focusing on population-based physical activity interventions, 10 reviews on individual-based and 6 reviews on both population-based and individual-based physical activity interventions). Results showed that population-based physical activity interventions are of great health economic potential if reaching a wider population at comparably low costs. Outstanding are political and environmental strategies, as well as interventions supporting behavioural change through information. The most comprehensive documentation for interventions promoting physical activity could be found for individual-based strategies (i. e. exercise advice or exercise programs). However, such programs are comparatively less cost-effective due to limited reach and higher utilization of resources.The present study provides an extensive review and analysis of the current international state of research regarding the health economic evaluation of interventions promoting physical activity. Results show favourable cost-effectiveness for interventions promoting physical activity, though significant differences in the effectiveness between various interventions were noticed. The greatest potential for cost-effectiveness can be seen in population-based interventions. At the same time, there is a need to acknowledge the limitations of the economic evidence in this field which are attributable to methodological challenges and research deficits.