Evaluating the cost‐effectiveness of laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding versus standard medical management in obese patients with type 2 diabetes in the <scp>UK</scp>

Pollock, Richard F; Muduma, Gorden; Valentine, William J.

doi:10.1111/j.1463-1326.2012.01692.x

Cited by 28 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The results of this study are partly in agreement with previous health economic evaluations of bariatric surgery in the UK. In the health technology assessment performed by Picot and co‐workers, the ICER for bariatric surgery ranged between €1833 (£1300) and €5640 (£4000) per QALY.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cost–utility analysis of bariatric surgery

Borisenko¹,

Lukyanov²,

Ahmed

2018

British Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…reported comparable results for GBP and AGB, yielding ICERs of €2139 (£1517) and €2720 (£1929) per QALY respectively. Finally, Pollock and colleagues demonstrated an ICER of €5079 (£3602) per QALY for AGB. ICERs in all three studies were well below the €28 200 (£20 000) per QALY threshold for cost‐effectiveness used by NICE.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost–utility analysis of bariatric surgery

Borisenko¹,

Lukyanov²,

Ahmed

2018

British Journal of Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…75 The second focused only on diabetic patients undergoing LAGB and calculated the ICER as £3602 using a 40-year time horizon. 172 An Australian study considering LAGB for BMI ≥ 35 kg/m 2 and using disability adjusted life-years rather than QALYs estimated the mean ICER using a lifetime horizon to be AU$2154. 173 A US study predicted ICERs of US$6600 for GBP and US$6300 for gastric banding over a lifetime perspective and based on normal BMI trajectories post surgery.…”

Section: Cost-effectivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Costs and outcomes of increasing access to bariatric surgery for obesity: cohort study and cost-effectiveness analysis using electronic health records

Gulliford

Charlton

Booth

et al. 2016

Health Serv Deliv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

et al. Costs and outcomes of increasing access to bariatric surgery for obesity: cohort study and cost-effectiveness analysis using electronic health records. Health Serv Deliv Res 2016;4(17). Health Services and Delivery ResearchISSN 2050-4349 (Print) ISSN 2050-4357 (Online) This journal is a member of and subscribes to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (www.publicationethics.org/).Editorial contact: nihredit@southampton.ac.ukThe full HS&DR archive is freely available to view online at www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/hsdr. Print-on-demand copies can be purchased from the report pages of the NIHR Journals Library website: www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk Criteria for inclusion in the Health Services and Delivery Research journalReports are published in Health Services and Delivery Research (HS&DR) if (1) they have resulted from work for the HS&DR programme or programmes which preceded the HS&DR programme, and (2) they are of a sufficiently high scientific quality as assessed by the reviewers and editors. HS&DR programmeThe Health Services and Delivery Research (HS&DR) programme, part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), was established to fund a broad range of research. It combines the strengths and contributions of two previous NIHR research programmes: the Health Services Research (HSR) programme and the Service Delivery and Organisation (SDO) programme, which were merged in January 2012.The HS&DR programme aims to produce rigorous and relevant evidence on the quality, access and organisation of health services including costs and outcomes, as well as research on implementation. The programme will enhance the strategic focus on research that matters to the NHS and is keen to support ambitious evaluative research to improve health services.For more information about the HS&DR programme please visit the website: http://www.nets.nihr.ac.uk/programmes/hsdr This reportThe research reported in this issue of the journal was funded by the HS&DR programme or one of its preceding programmes as project number 12/5005/12. The contractual start date was in October 2013. The final report began editorial review in October 2015 and was accepted for publication in February 2016. The authors have been wholly responsible for all data collection, analysis and interpretation, and for writing up their work. The HS&DR editors and production house have tried to ensure the accuracy of the authors' report and would like to thank the reviewers for their constructive comments on the final report document. However, they do not accept liability for damages or losses arising from material published in this report.This report presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views and opinions expressed by authors in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HS&DR programme or the Department of Health. If there are verbatim quotations included in this publication the views and opinion...

show abstract

“…The reviews were commissioned by the U.K. National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment program (12) and the National Clinical Guidelines Centre (NCGC) and were published in 2009 and 2015. Across both reviews, four studies were identified that met the NCGC quality criteria (13–16) (eight further economic evaluations were excluded based on grounds of quality or scope by the NCGC). All four studies used probabilistic decision analytic modeling to estimate the incremental costs and benefits of bariatric/metabolic surgery when compared with nonsurgical management in patients with type 2 diabetes in periods of up to 40 years.…”

Section: Cost-effectiveness Of Bariatric/metabolic Surgery For Patienmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All four studies used probabilistic decision analytic modeling to estimate the incremental costs and benefits of bariatric/metabolic surgery when compared with nonsurgical management in patients with type 2 diabetes in periods of up to 40 years. Modeled populations lived in Australia (16), the U.K. (13,14), and the U.S. (15). …”

Section: Cost-effectiveness Of Bariatric/metabolic Surgery For Patienmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying Barriers to Appropriate Use of Metabolic/Bariatric Surgery for Type 2 Diabetes Treatment: Policy Lab Results

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite increasing recognition of the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of bariatric/metabolic surgery in the treatment of type 2 diabetes, few patients who may be appropriate candidates and may benefit from this type of surgery avail themselves of this treatment option. To identify conceptual and practical barriers to appropriate use of surgical procedures, a Policy Lab was hosted at the 3rd World Congress on Interventional Therapies for Type 2 Diabetes on 29 September 2015. Twenty-six stakeholders participated in the Policy Lab, including academics, clinicians, policy-makers, industry leaders, and patient representatives. Participants were provided with a summary of available evidence about the cost-effectiveness of bariatric/metabolic surgery and the costs of increasing the use of bariatric/metabolic surgery, using U.K. and U.S. scenarios as examples of distinct health care systems. There was widespread agreement among this group of stakeholders that bariatric/metabolic surgery is a legitimate and cost-effective approach to the treatment of type 2 diabetes in obese patients. The following four building blocks were identified to facilitate policy changes: 1) communicating the scale of the costs and harms associated with rising prevalence of type 2 diabetes; 2) properly articulating the role of bariatric/metabolic surgery for certain population groups; 3) identifying new funding sources for bariatric/metabolic surgery; and 4) incorporating bariatric/metabolic surgery into the appropriate clinical pathways. Although more research is needed to identify specific clinical scenarios for the prioritization of bariatric/metabolic surgery, the case appears to be strong enough to engage relevant policy-makers and practitioners in a concerted discussion of how to better use metabolic surgical resources in conjunction with other interventions in good diabetes practice.

show abstract

Evaluating the cost‐effectiveness of laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding versus standard medical management in obese patients with type 2 diabetes in the UK

Abstract: On the basis of data from a recent randomized controlled trial, LAGB is likely to be considered cost-effective from the healthcare payer perspective when compared with SMM of obesity in patients with type 2 diabetes in the UK setting.

Cited by 28 publications

References 30 publications

Cost–utility analysis of bariatric surgery

Cost–utility analysis of bariatric surgery

Costs and outcomes of increasing access to bariatric surgery for obesity: cohort study and cost-effectiveness analysis using electronic health records

Identifying Barriers to Appropriate Use of Metabolic/Bariatric Surgery for Type 2 Diabetes Treatment: Policy Lab Results

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About