EMPLOYEE PERCEPTIONS AND EXPERIENCES WITH TIRZEPATIDE TREATMENT FOR OBESITY OR OVERWEIGHT IN THE US

Author(s)

Theresa Hunter, BA, MPH, MS, PhD1, Tamara Al-zubeidi, BSc honor Human Biosciences2, Claire Gerber, PhD, MPH3, Aikaterini Vardavoulia, BSc Psychology, MSc Health Psychology2, Alexandra Lin, PharmD3, Xuanyao He, PhD statistics3, Michael Shepherd, R.N., BSN3, Angela Fitch, MD4, Harold Bays, MD, MFOMA, FTOS, FACC, FNLA, FASPC, DABOM5;
1Eli Lilly and Company, Research Scientist, Indianapolis, IN, USA, 2Clarivate Analytics, London, United Kingdom, 3Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA, 4Knownwell, Needham, MA, USA, 5Louisville Metabolic and Atherosclerosis Research Center, Louisville, KY, USA
OBJECTIVES: This study examined perspectives of individuals starting tirzepatide (“initiators”) regarding their employer-sponsored healthcare benefits and highlighted barriers to accessing obesity medications (OMs).
METHODS: This was a descriptive analysis of baseline data from an ongoing US longitudinal survey conducted June-November 2025 among OM-eligible (BMI ≥30 kg/m2, or 27-29.9 kg/m2 with ≥1 obesity-related complication) full-time employees without T2D initiating tirzepatide for obesity/overweight. Participants reported perceptions of employer-sponsored health insurance (EHI; including OM coverage), job satisfaction, retention, prioritization of employer benefits, and involvement in workplace wellness programs.
RESULTS: Among 518 individuals who initiated tirzepatide (78.2% female; 69.5% White; mean age, 46.0 years; mean BMI, 38.4 kg/m2), their highest education levels were bachelor's (29.3%) and graduate degrees (29.2%), with mean employment duration of 7.5 years. Education (16.2%) and hospital/provider systems (16.2%) were the top employment industries. Majority (80.9%) of individuals had EHI; however, only 55.9% had OM coverage. Among individuals whose employers’ offered weight loss-related wellness programs, 14.7% (N=157) reported that they were required to enroll in these programs to access tirzepatide. Overall (N=518), 96.5% of employees expressed their EHI should include OM coverage. Reasons why these individuals (n=500) believed that OMs should be covered by EHI included improvement in health (94.8%), emotional well-being (84.6%), work productivity (81.2%), and reduced long-term healthcare costs (90.8%). Overall, offering OM coverage as an employee benefit would increase retention (78.5%) and enhance job satisfaction (81.7%). Additionally, 52.3% of employees indicated they would switch jobs for access to OM coverage. Majority of individuals (84.4%) reported that having OM coverage would be rated in their top 5 employer benefits, with 34.4% indicating it as their top-rated benefit.
CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world survey, majority of participants had EHI; however, only half had OM coverage. Individuals viewed OM coverage as an important benefit that could potentially improve their job satisfaction and retention.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2026-05, ISPOR 2026, Philadelphia, PA, USA

Value in Health, Volume 29, Issue S6

Code

PCR169

Topic

Patient-Centered Research

Topic Subcategory

Patient Engagement

Disease

No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas, SDC: Diabetes/Endocrine/Metabolic Disorders (including obesity)

Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×