Incremental Net Monetary Benefit of Bariatric Surgery: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cost-Effectiveness Evidences.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Noparatayaporn P
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8175295 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundNeonatal hypoglycaemia is a common but treatable metabolic disorder that affects newborn infants and which, if not identified and treated adequately, may result in neurological sequelae that persist for the lifetime of the patient. The long-term financial and quality-of-life burden of neonatal hypoglycaemia has not been previously examined.MethodsWe assessed the postnatal hospital and long-term costs associated with neonatal hypoglycaemia over 80 year and 18 year time horizons, using a health-system perspective and assessing impact on quality of life using quality-adjusted life year (QALYs). A decision analytic model was used to represent key outcomes in the presence and absence of neonatal hypoglycaemia.ResultsThe chance of developing one of the outcomes of neonatal hypoglycaemia in our model (cerebral palsy, learning disabilities, seizures, vision disorders) was 24.03% in subjects who experienced neonatal hypoglycaemia and 3.56% in those who do did not. Over an 80 year time horizon a subject who experienced neonatal hypoglycaemia had a combined hospital and post-discharge cost of NZ$72,000 due to the outcomes modelled, which is NZ$66,000 greater than a subject without neonatal hypoglycaemia. The net monetary benefit lost due to neonatal hypoglycaemia, using a value per QALY of NZ$43,000, is NZ$180,000 over an 80 year time horizon.ConclusionsEven under the most conservative of estimates, neonatal hypoglycaemia contributes a significant financial burden to the health system both during childhood and over a lifetime. The combination of direct costs and loss of quality of life due to neonatal hypoglycaemia means that this condition warrants further research to focus on prevention and effective treatment.
| S-EPMC7863541 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To analyze the cost-effectiveness of bariatric surgery in severely obese (BMI >or=35 kg/m(2)) adults who have diabetes, using a validated diabetes cost-effectiveness model.We expanded the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-RTI Diabetes Cost-Effectiveness Model to incorporate bariatric surgery. In this simulation model, bariatric surgery may lead to diabetes remission and reductions in other risk factors, which then lead to fewer diabetes complications and increased quality of life (QoL). Surgery is also associated with perioperative mortality and subsequent complications, and patients in remission may relapse to diabetes. We separately estimate the costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and cost-effectiveness of gastric bypass surgery relative to usual diabetes care and of gastric banding surgery relative to usual diabetes care. We examine the cost-effectiveness of each type of surgery for severely obese individuals who are newly diagnosed with diabetes and for severely obese individuals with established diabetes.In all analyses, bariatric surgery increased QALYs and increased costs. Bypass surgery had cost-effectiveness ratios of $7,000/QALY and $12,000/QALY for severely obese patients with newly diagnosed and established diabetes, respectively. Banding surgery had cost-effectiveness ratios of $11,000/QALY and $13,000/QALY for the respective groups. In sensitivity analyses, the cost-effectiveness ratios were most affected by assumptions about the direct gain in QoL from BMI loss following surgery.Our analysis indicates that gastric bypass and gastric banding are cost-effective methods of reducing mortality and diabetes complications in severely obese adults with diabetes.
| S-EPMC2928336 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundHistorically, a priori power and sample size calculations have not been routinely performed cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA), partly because the absence of published cost and effectiveness correlation and variance data, which are essential for power and sample size calculations. Importantly, the empirical correlation between cost and effectiveness has not been examined with respect to the estimation of value-for-money in clinical literature. Therefore, it is not well established if cost-effectiveness studies embedded within randomized-controlled-trials (RCTs) are under- or over-powered to detect changes in value-for-money. However, recently guidelines (such as those from ISPOR) and funding agencies have suggested sample size and power calculations should be considered in CEAs embedded in clinical trials.MethodsWe examined all RCTs conducted by the Canadian Cancer Trials Group with an embedded cost-effectiveness analysis. Variance and correlation of effectiveness and costs were derived from original-trial data. The incremental net benefit method was used to calculate the power of the cost-effectiveness analysis, with exploration of alternative correlation and willingness-to-pay values.ResultsWe identified four trials for inclusion. We observed that a hypothetical scenario of correlation coefficient of zero between cost and effectiveness led to a conservative estimate of sample size. The cost-effectiveness analysis was under-powered to detect changes in value-for-money in two trials, at willingness-to-pay of $100,000. Based on our observations, we present six considerations for future economic evaluations, and an online program to help analysts include a priori sample size and power calculations in future clinical trials.ConclusionThe correlation between cost and effectiveness had a potentially meaningful impact on the power and variance of value-for-money estimates in the examined cost-effectiveness analyses. Therefore, the six considerations and online program, may facilitate a priori power calculations in embedded cost-effectiveness analyses in future clinical trials.
| S-EPMC10398980 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cost-effectiveness analysis is an essential part of the evaluation of new medical interventions. While in many studies both costs and effectiveness (eg, survival time) are censored, standard survival analysis techniques are often invalid due to the induced dependent censoring problem. We propose methods for censored cost-effectiveness data using the net-benefit regression framework, which allow covariate-adjustment and subgroup identification when comparing two intervention groups. The methods provide a straightforward way to construct cost-effectiveness acceptability curves with censored data. We also propose a more efficient doubly robust estimator of average causal incremental net benefit, which increases the likelihood that the results will represent a valid inference in observational studies. Lastly, we conduct extensive numerical studies to examine the finite-sample performance of the proposed methods, and illustrate the proposed methods with a real data example using both survival time and quality-adjusted survival time as the measures of effectiveness.
| S-EPMC9427707 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Considerations regarding clinical effectiveness and cost are essential in comparing the overall value of two treatments. There has been growing interest in methodology to integrate cost and effectiveness measures in order to inform policy and promote adequate resource allocation. The net monetary benefit aggregates information on differences in mean cost and clinical outcomes; the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve was developed to characterize the extent to which the strength of evidence regarding net monetary benefit changes with fluctuations in the willingness-to-pay threshold. Methods to derive insights from characteristics of the cost/clinical outcomes besides mean differences remain undeveloped but may also be informative. We propose a novel probabilistic measure of cost-effectiveness based on the stochastic ordering of the individual net benefit distribution under each treatment. Our approach is able to accommodate features frequently encountered in observational data including confounding and censoring, and complements the net monetary benefit in the insights it provides. We conduct a range of simulations to evaluate finite-sample performance and illustrate our proposed approach using simulated data based on a study of endometrial cancer patients.
| S-EPMC8211369 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceObesity is the most common risk factor for nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), the progressive form of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease that can lead to cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. Weight loss can be an effective treatment for obesity and may slow the progression of advanced liver disease.ObjectiveTo assess the cost-effectiveness of bariatric surgery in patients with NASH and compensated cirrhosis.Design, setting, and participantsThis economic evaluation study used a Markov-based state-transition model to simulate the benefits and risks of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG), laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (GB), and intensive lifestyle intervention (ILI) compared with usual care in patients with NASH and compensated cirrhosis and varying baseline weight (overweight, mild obesity, moderate obesity, and severe obesity). Patients faced varied risks of perioperative mortality and complications depending on the type of surgery they underwent. Data were collected on March 22, 2017.Main outcomes and measuresLife-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), costs (in 2017 $US), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated.ResultsDemographic characteristics of the patient population were based on a previously published prospective study (n = 161). Patients in the model were 41.0% female, and the base case age was 54 years. Compared with usual care, SG was associated with an increase in QALYs of 0.263 to 1.180 (bounds of ranges represent overweight to severe obesity); GB, 0.263 to 1.207; and ILI, 0.004 to 0.216. Sleeve gastrectomy was also associated with an increase in life-years of 0.693 to 1.930; GB, 0.694 to 1.947; and ILI, 0.012 to 0.114. With usual care, expected life-years in overweight, mild obesity, moderate obesity, and severe obesity were 12.939, 11.949, 10.976, and 10.095, respectively. With usual care, QALY in overweight was 6.418; mild obesity, 5.790; moderate obesity, 5.186; and severe obesity, 4.577. Sleeve gastrectomy was the most cost-effective option for patients across all weight classes assessed: ICER for SG in patients with overweight was $66 119 per QALY; mild obesity, $18 716 per QALY; moderate obesity, $10 274 per QALY; and severe obesity, $6563 per QALY. A threshold analysis on the procedure cost of GB found that for GB to be cost-effective, the cost of the surgery must be decreased from its baseline value of $28 734 by $4889 for mild obesity, by $3189 for moderate obesity, and by $2289 for severe obesity. In overweight patients, GB involved fewer QALYs than SG, and thus decreasing the cost of surgery would not result in cost-effectiveness.Conclusions and relevanceBariatric surgery could be highly cost-effective in patients with NASH compensated cirrhosis and obesity or overweight. The findings from this analysis suggest that it can inform clinical trials evaluating the effect of bariatric procedures in patients with NASH cirrhosis, including those with a lower body mass index.
| S-EPMC6484583 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Effect of bariatric surgery on microbiome composition and microbial metabolomics.
| PRJEB28869 | ENA
Project description:Bariatric surgery Targeted loci environmental
| PRJNA1041054 | ENA
Project description:Projection of gut microbiome pre and post bariatric surgery to predict surgery outcome
| PRJEB39382 | ENA
Project description:People living with obesity have been among those most disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, highlighting the urgent need for increased provision of bariatric and metabolic surgery (BMS). To evaluate the possible clinical and economic benefits of BMS compared with nonsurgical treatment options in the UK, considering the broader impact that COVID-19 has on people living with obesity. Single-payer healthcare system (National Health Service, England). A Markov model compared lifetime costs and outcomes of BMS and conventional treatment among patients with body mass index (BMI) ≥ 40 kg/m2, BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2 with obesity-related co-morbidities (Group A), or BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2 with type 2 diabetes (T2D; Group B). Inputs were sourced from clinical audit data and literature sources; direct and indirect costs were considered. Model outputs included costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Scenario analyses whereby patients experienced COVID-19 infection, BMS was delayed by five years, and BMS patients underwent endoscopy were conducted. In both groups, BMS was dominant versus conventional treatment, at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £25,000/QALY. When COVID-19 infections were considered, BMS remained dominant and, across 1000 patients, prevented 117 deaths, 124 hospitalizations, and 161 intensive care unit admissions in Group A, and 64 deaths, 65 hospitalizations, and 90 intensive care unit admissions in Group B. Delaying BMS by 5 years resulted in higher costs and lower QALYs in both groups compared with not delaying treatment. Increased provision of BMS would be expected to reduce COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality, as well as obesity-related co-morbidities, ultimately reducing the clinical and economic burden of obesity.
| S-EPMC8313820 | biostudies-literature