A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of non-surgical obesity interventions in men

Abstract

Background: Increasing obesity related health conditions have a substantial burden on population health and healthcare spending. Obesity may have a sex-specific impact on disease development, men and women may respond differently to interventions, and there may be sex-specific differences to the cost-effectiveness of interventions to address obesity. There is no clear indication of cost-effective treatments for men. Methods: This systematic review summarises the literature reporting the cost-effectiveness of non-surgical weight-management interventions for men. Studies were quality assessed against a checklist for appraising decision modelling studies. Results: Although none of the included studies explicitly set out to determine the cost-effectiveness of treatment for men, seven studies reported results for subgroups of men. Interventions were grouped into lifestyle interventions (five studies) and Orlistat (two studies). The retrieved studies showed promising evidence of cost-effectiveness, especially when interventions were targeted at high-risk groups, such as those with impaired glucose tolerance. There appears to be some sex-specific elements to cost-effectiveness, however, there were no clear trends or indications of what may be contributing to this. Conclusion: The economic evidence was highly uncertain, and limited by variable methodological quality of the included studies. It was therefore not possible to draw strong conclusions on cost-effectiveness. Future studies are required to demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of interventions specifically targeted towards weight loss for men.