The Association Between Body Mass Index and Health and Economic Outcomes in the United States

DiBonaventura, Marco; Lay, A Le; Kumar, Manish; Hammer, Mette; Wolden, Michael Lyng

doi:10.1097/jom.0000000000000539

Cited by 28 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent with our results, other studies have found that obesity has economic consequences;[2] on the one hand, it causes unemployment[2627] or discrimination in employment and wages,[28] reduces the income,[1129] reduces productivity,[230] leads to earlier retirement[25] and employees face more healthcare costs. [11] The important thing is that obese people will not be able to work efficiently due to problems and disabilities, and by decreasing their economic life and early employment, the whole economic system of the country will be endangered.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Obesity consequences from the people's perspective living in Kurdish regions of Iran: A qualitative content analysis

Irandoost

Taghdisi

Dehdari

et al. 2019

J Edu Health Promot

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Obesity consequences from the people's perspective living in Kurdish regions of Iran: A qualitative content analysis

Irandoost

Taghdisi

Dehdari

et al. 2019

J Edu Health Promot

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The economic burden of T2D is increased in patients who are overweight or obese 10 . These patients are at increased risk of co-morbidities and, consequently, have significantly greater medical expenditures than individuals with diabetes and normal weight [11][12][13] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost-effectiveness of once-weekly semaglutide versus dulaglutide and lixisenatide in patients with type 2 diabetes with inadequate glycemic control in Sweden

Ericsson¹,

Fridhammar

2019

Journal of Medical Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims: This analysis evaluated the cost-effectiveness of once-weekly semaglutide vs glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) uncontrolled on metformin or basal insulin in Sweden. Materials and methods: This cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) was conducted using the Swedish Institute of Health Economics (IHE) Diabetes Cohort Model. Analyses were conducted from the Swedish societal perspective over a time horizon of 40 years. For patients uncontrolled on metformin, dulaglutide was the comparator, and data from the SUSTAIN 7 clinical trial was used. For patients uncontrolled on basal insulin, lixisenatide was chosen as the comparator and data was obtained from a network meta-analysis (NMA). Results: The results show that, in patients with inadequate control on metformin, semaglutide 1.0 mg dominated (i.e. provided greater clinical benefit, and was less costly) dulaglutide 1.5 mg. In patients with inadequate control on basal insulin, semaglutide 1.0 mg dominated lixisenatide. The reduction in costs is largely driven by the reduction in complications seen with once-weekly semaglutide. Limitations and conclusions: It is likely that this analysis is conservative in estimating the cardiovascular (CV) cost benefits associated with treatment with once-weekly semaglutide. In patients inadequately controlled on basal insulin, the analyses vs lixisenatide were based on results from an NMA, as no head-to-head clinical trial has been conducted for this comparison. These CEA results show that once-weekly semaglutide is a cost-effective GLP-1 RA therapy for the treatment of T2D in patients inadequately controlled on metformin or basal insulin, addressing many current clinician, patient, and payer unmet needs in Sweden. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

“…The current study contributes information on precisely these measures. DiBonaventura et al [34] conducted a study in which they identified an association between increased BMI and decreased work productivity, indicating that public expenses and personal income might also be affected by obesity. Our findings support this consideration and draw attention to the significant impact of obesity on the individuals' personal life with regard to income, in addition to its negative impact on socioeconomics.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because of the increasing prevalence of obesity and its potential impact on society, it is important to provide information on direct healthcare costs and other obesity-related costs of socioeconomic importance as well. DiBonaventura et al [34] found a decrease in work productivity with increasing BMI. They found that health problems among obese individuals resulted in an overall work impairment of 20%.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Socioeconomic Burden of Obesity

Kjellberg¹,

Larsen

Ibsen

et al. 2017

Obes Facts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To evaluate the socioeconomic impact of obesity by estimating the direct and indirect costs associated with obesity in Denmark, based on individual level data. Methods: Costs were assessed for different BMI groups, and the relative risks for change in direct and indirect costs per BMI point above 30 were estimated. A fourth analysis estimated the odds ratio for comorbidities per BMI point above 30. Individual data on income, social transfer payments, healthcare costs and diagnoses were retrieved from national registries. Results: One BMI point above 30 was associated with a 2% decrease in income, a 3% increase in social transfer payments, and a 4% increase in healthcare costs. In absolute numbers, income contributed to most of the total economic burden. One BMI point above 30 was also associated with increased comorbidity, which explains the increase in both direct and indirect costs. Conclusion: Obesity is associated with increased comorbidity, giving rise to an increase in both direct and indirect costs. Especially income is affected, which emphasizes the importance of including both measures when evaluating the total socioeconomic burden of obesity. Our findings draw attention to the potential for saving public resources and preventing loss of income by preventing obesity.

show abstract

The Association Between Body Mass Index and Health and Economic Outcomes in the United States

Abstract: Increasing BMI was associated with decreasing health status and increasing work-related impairment, healthcare resource utilization, and costs.

Cited by 28 publications

References 32 publications

Obesity consequences from the people's perspective living in Kurdish regions of Iran: A qualitative content analysis

Obesity consequences from the people's perspective living in Kurdish regions of Iran: A qualitative content analysis

Cost-effectiveness of once-weekly semaglutide versus dulaglutide and lixisenatide in patients with type 2 diabetes with inadequate glycemic control in Sweden

The Socioeconomic Burden of Obesity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About