Presentation (CTI)

OBJECTIVES: Wider societal impacts are increasingly recognised as important in assessing the value of health interventions. Both ICER in the US, and the UK Department of Health and Social Care have published frameworks that quantify components of wider societal impact such as paid and unpaid productivity. We compared these frameworks and explored differences in estimated societal impacts between populations who are overweight and those living with obesity.
METHODS: We estimated societal impacts, at individual level and population levels by reducing obesity prevalence by 10%, using the two frameworks in representative UK and US populations, as well as an identical cohort (age, gender and quality of life [QoL]). QoL scores were associated with living with obesity and being overweight. We compared the overall societal impacts and individual components of value at 1-year.
RESULTS: Overweight individuals had an average QoL gain of 0.045 compared to individuals living with obesity, leading to annual societal gains per person of $8,935 in the US and $2,033 in the UK. The US model estimated higher annual paid production gains ($4,335 versus $403 per person in the UK) due to higher wages and estimated production time gains (94hrs versus 14hrs). However, unpaid production gains were larger in the UK ($1,378 versus $1,265 per person in the US). Using an identical cohort, the US model reported larger total gains of $8,793 per person versus $1,988 in the UK. At a population level, the respective models suggest a 10% obesity prevalence reduction could result in annual net production gains of $70.6bn in the US and $2.81bn in the UK.
CONCLUSIONS: Both the US and UK frameworks estimate significant societal economic gains if obesity prevalence is reduced. The US framework estimates a greater societal benefit at population and individual level.