Economic costs of obesity in Thailand: a retrospective cost-of-illness study

Abstract

BackgroundOver the last decade, the prevalence of obesity (BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2) in Thailand has been rising rapidly and consistently. Estimating the cost of obesity to society is an essential step in setting priorities for research and resource use and helping improve public awareness of the negative economic impacts of obesity. This prevalence-based, cost-of-illness study aims to estimate the economic costs of obesity in Thailand.MethodsThe estimated costs in this study included health care cost, cost of productivity loss due to premature mortality, and cost of productivity loss due to hospital-related absenteeism. The Obesity-Attributable Fraction (OAF) was used to estimate the extent to which the co-morbidities were attributable to obesity. The health care cost of obesity was further estimated by multiplying the number of patients in each disease category attributable to obesity by the unit cost of treatment. The cost of productivity loss was calculated using the human capital approach.ResultsThe health care cost attributable to obesity was estimated at 5,584 million baht or 1.5% of national health expenditure. The cost of productivity loss attributable to obesity was estimated at 6,558 million baht - accounting for 54% of the total cost of obesity. The cost of hospital-related absenteeism was estimated at 694 million baht, while the cost of premature mortality was estimated at 5,864 million baht. The total cost of obesity was then estimated at 12,142 million baht (725.3 million US$PPP, 16.74 baht =1 US$PPP accounting for 0.13% of Thailand’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP).ConclusionsObesity imposes a substantial economic burden on Thai society especially in term of health care costs. Large-scale comprehensive interventions focused on improving public awareness of the cost of and problems associated with obesity and promoting a healthy lifestyle should be regarded as a public health priority.

Health-Risk Factors and 8-Year Incidence of Kidney Disease in Transitional Thailand: Prospective Findings From a Large National Cohort Study

“…A British cohort study revealed that obesity when young (less than 40 years) was significantly associated with a higher risk of KD incidence (Silverwood et al, 2013). Multiple studies have shown obesity is a risk for KD which then becomes part of the enormous national cost of excess weight (W. Chen et al, 2009;Du et al, 2017;Pitayatienanan et al, 2014;L. Xue et al, 2014).…”

“…Thailand's rapid socio-economic development in the last 4 decades leads to urbanization (Lim, Kjellstrom, et al, 2009), and sedentary work. People consume more calories and more fat, sugar and salt (Aekplakorn et al, 2011;Lim et al, 2014;Pitayatienanan et al, 2014). Urbanization altered lifestyle with more alcohol consumption and a higher incidence of non-communicable diseases such as hypertension, high cholesterol and obesity (Wakabayashi et al, 2015).…”

The impact on productivity of a hypothetical tax on sugar-sweetened beverages

“…In Asia, several studies have measured productivity changes due to obesity. The cost of productivity losses due to obesity was estimated to be approximately 7 billion Baht (US$390 million) in Thailand in 2009 (20). In New Zealand, the productivity losses due to obesity were equivalent to 1.6% of the total healthcare expenditure in 2005 (21).…”

Effectiveness of Obesity Prevention and Control

“…Another review in 10 European countries indicated that the cost of obesity is responsible for 0.09%-0.61% of the gross domestic product (Müller-Riemenschneider 2008). Several studies have also examined the economic cost of obesity in Asia-Pacific countries (Ko 2008, Zhao 2008, Pitayatienanan et al 2014, while a recent systematic review (Hoque 2016) identified 13 articles examining the economic burden of obesity in Australia; the People's Republic of China (PRC); Hong Kong, China; Japan, the Republic of Korea; New Zealand; Taipei,China; and Thailand. It revealed that overweight and obesity was responsible for 1.5%-9.9% of their total health expenditures.…”