Arendse Tange Larsen1, Betina Højgaard2, Rikke Ibsen3, Jakob Kjellberg2. 1. University of Copenhagen, Øster Farimagsgade 5, 1353, Copenhagen, Denmark. arendse.tange.larsen@live.dk. 2. Danish Institute for Local and Regional Government Research, KORA, Købmagergade 22, 1150, Copenhagen, Denmark. 3. i2minds, Møllegade 32, Aarhus, 8000, Denmark.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: A recurring argument for bariatric surgery is cost savings due to sustained weight loss and reductions in comorbidities. However, studies prompting this argument tend to focus only on health care costs, and in some of them, cost changes after surgery have been modelled. The aim of this study was to generate real-world evidence on the socio-economic impact of bariatric surgery, by evaluating the effect on both direct and indirect costs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using real-world data from national registries, predictions of health care costs, social transfer payments and income were performed for a surgically treated individual and compared to those for a similar but non-surgically treated individual 3 years before and after surgery. Secondly, the relative risks for health care costs, social transfer payments and income of a surgical group compared with a non-surgical group were estimated. The non-surgical group was defined as being eligible for bariatric surgery but not undergoing it. RESULTS: Bariatric surgery was associated with higher, but insignificantly so, health care costs, primarily due to an increase in somatic inpatient services. A significant decrease in costs of drugs was seen, especially for anti-diabetic medication. Bariatric surgery had a slight positive effect on social transfer payments and no significant effect on income. CONCLUSIONS: There are no cost savings of bariatric surgery in the short run. Further real-world evidence over a longer period of time is needed to examine whether the higher health care costs will eventually be counterbalanced, making bariatric surgery a profitable intervention in a socio-economic perspective.
INTRODUCTION: A recurring argument for bariatric surgery is cost savings due to sustained weight loss and reductions in comorbidities. However, studies prompting this argument tend to focus only on health care costs, and in some of them, cost changes after surgery have been modelled. The aim of this study was to generate real-world evidence on the socio-economic impact of bariatric surgery, by evaluating the effect on both direct and indirect costs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using real-world data from national registries, predictions of health care costs, social transfer payments and income were performed for a surgically treated individual and compared to those for a similar but non-surgically treated individual 3 years before and after surgery. Secondly, the relative risks for health care costs, social transfer payments and income of a surgical group compared with a non-surgical group were estimated. The non-surgical group was defined as being eligible for bariatric surgery but not undergoing it. RESULTS: Bariatric surgery was associated with higher, but insignificantly so, health care costs, primarily due to an increase in somatic inpatient services. A significant decrease in costs of drugs was seen, especially for anti-diabetic medication. Bariatric surgery had a slight positive effect on social transfer payments and no significant effect on income. CONCLUSIONS: There are no cost savings of bariatric surgery in the short run. Further real-world evidence over a longer period of time is needed to examine whether the higher health care costs will eventually be counterbalanced, making bariatric surgery a profitable intervention in a socio-economic perspective.
Entities:
Keywords:
Bariatric surgery; Economic evaluation; Health care costs; Real-world evidence; Socio-economics
Authors: Jonathan F Finks; Kerry L Kole; Panduranga R Yenumula; Wayne J English; Kevin R Krause; Arthur M Carlin; Jeffrey A Genaw; Mousumi Banerjee; John D Birkmeyer; Nancy J Birkmeyer Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2011-10 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Melinda A Maggard; Lisa R Shugarman; Marika Suttorp; Margaret Maglione; Harvey J Sugerman; Harvey J Sugarman; Edward H Livingston; Ninh T Nguyen; Zhaoping Li; Walter A Mojica; Lara Hilton; Shannon Rhodes; Sally C Morton; Paul G Shekelle Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2005-04-05 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: J Picot; J Jones; J L Colquitt; E Gospodarevskaya; E Loveman; L Baxter; A J Clegg Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2009-09 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Viktoria L Gloy; Matthias Briel; Deepak L Bhatt; Sangeeta R Kashyap; Philip R Schauer; Geltrude Mingrone; Heiner C Bucher; Alain J Nordmann Journal: BMJ Date: 2013-10-22
Authors: Mette Bøgelund; Nils B Jørgensen; Sten Madsbad; Maria Spanggaard; Ulrik H Panton; Mikkel H Pedersen; Pierre Johansen Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2022-01-26 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Jean-Eric Tarride; Aristithes G Doumouras; Dennis Hong; J Michael Paterson; Semra Tibebu; Richard Perez; Julia Ma; Valerie H Taylor; Feng Xie; Vanessa Boudreau; Eleanor Pullenayegum; David R Urbach; Mehran Anvari Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2020-09-16 Impact factor: 14.766