Dataset Information

Health care costs attributable to overweight calculated in a standardized way for three European countries.

ABSTRACT: This article presents a tool to calculate health care costs attributable to overweight in a comparable and standardized way. The purpose is to describe the methodological principles of the tool and to put it into use by calculating and comparing the costs attributable to overweight for The Netherlands, Germany and Czech Republic. The tool uses a top-down and prevalence-based approach, consisting of five steps. Step one identifies overweight-related diseases and age- and gender-specific relative risks. Included diseases are ischemic heart disease, stroke, hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus, colorectal cancer, postmenopausal breast cancer, endometrial cancer, kidney cancer and osteoarthritis. Step two consists of collecting data on the age- and gender-specific prevalence of these diseases. Step three uses the population-attributable prevalence to determine the part of the prevalence of these diseases that is attributable to overweight. Step four calculates the health care costs associated with these diseases. Step five calculates the costs of these diseases that are attributable to overweight. Overweight is responsible for 20-26% of the direct costs of included diseases, with sensitivity analyses varying this percentage between 15-31%. Percentage of costs attributable to obesity and preobesity is about the same. Diseases with the highest percentage of costs due to overweight are diabetes, endometrial cancer and osteoarthritis. Disease costs attributable to overweight as a percentage of total health care expenditures range from 2 to 4%. Data are consistent for all three countries, resulting in roughly a quarter of costs of included diseases being attributable to overweight.

SUBMITTER: Lette M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4705131 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeAchieving greater health and social care integration is a policy priority in many countries, but challenges remain. We focused on governance and accountability for integrated care and explored arrangements that shape more integrated delivery models or systems in Italy, the Netherlands and Scotland. We also examined how the COVID-19 pandemic affected existing governance arrangements.Design/methodology/approachA case study approach involving document review and semi-structured interviews with 35 stakeholders in 10 study sites between February 2021 and April 2022. We used the Transparency, Accountability, Participation, Integrity and Capability (TAPIC) framework to guide our analytical enquiry.FindingsStudy sites ranged from bottom-up voluntary agreements in the Netherlands to top-down mandated integration in Scotland. Interviews identified seven themes that were seen to have helped or hindered integration efforts locally. Participants described a disconnect between what national or regional governments aspire to achieve and their own efforts to implement this vision. This resulted in blurred, and sometimes contradictory, lines of accountability between the centre and local sites. Flexibility and time to allow for national policies to be adapted to local contexts, and engaged local leaders, were seen to be key to delivering the integration agenda. Health care, and in particular acute hospital care, was reported to dominate social care in terms of policies, resource allocation and national monitoring systems, thereby undermining better collaboration locally. The pandemic highlighted and exacerbated existing strengths and weaknesses but was not seen as a major disruptor to the overall vision for the health and social care system.Research limitationsWe included a relatively small number of interviews per study site, limiting our ability to explore complexities within sites.OriginalityThis study highlights that governance is relatively neglected as a focus of attention in this context but addressing governance challenges is key for successful collaboration.

Project description:ObjectivesWithin the framework of the burden of disease (BoD) approach, disease and injury burden estimates attributable to risk factors are a useful guide for policy formulation and priority setting in disease prevention. Considering the important differences in methods, and their impact on burden estimates, we conducted a scoping literature review to: (1) map the BoD assessments including risk factors performed across Europe; and (2) identify the methodological choices in comparative risk assessment (CRA) and risk assessment methods.MethodsWe searched multiple literature databases, including grey literature websites and targeted public health agencies websites.ResultsA total of 113 studies were included in the synthesis and further divided into independent BoD assessments (54 studies) and studies linked to the Global Burden of Disease (59 papers). Our results showed that the methods used to perform CRA varied substantially across independent European BoD studies. While there were some methodological choices that were more common than others, we did not observe patterns in terms of country, year or risk factor. Each methodological choice can affect the comparability of estimates between and within countries and/or risk factors, since they might significantly influence the quantification of the attributable burden. From our analysis we observed that the use of CRA was less common for some types of risk factors and outcomes. These included environmental and occupational risk factors, which are more likely to use bottom-up approaches for health outcomes where disease envelopes may not be available.ConclusionsOur review also highlighted misreporting, the lack of uncertainty analysis and the under-investigation of causal relationships in BoD studies. Development and use of guidelines for performing and reporting BoD studies will help understand differences, avoid misinterpretations thus improving comparability among estimates.RegistrationThe study protocol has been registered on PROSPERO, CRD42020177477 (available at: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ ).

Dataset Information

Health care costs attributable to overweight calculated in a standardized way for three European countries.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets