Cost-Utility Analysis of Metabolic Bariatric Surgery for Individuals with Obesity in Saudi Arabia
10
Issued Date
2025-01-01
Resource Type
eISSN
11786981
Scopus ID
2-s2.0-105012279911
Journal Title
Clinicoeconomics and Outcomes Research
Volume
17
Start Page
519
End Page
533
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Clinicoeconomics and Outcomes Research Vol.17 (2025) , 519-533
Suggested Citation
Nagi M.A., Turongkaravee S., Almalki Z.S., Thavorncharoensap M., Sangroongruangsri S., Chaikledkaew U., Alqahtani A.M., Alsharif L.S., Alsubaihi I.A., Alzarea A.I., Alsultan M.M. Cost-Utility Analysis of Metabolic Bariatric Surgery for Individuals with Obesity in Saudi Arabia. Clinicoeconomics and Outcomes Research Vol.17 (2025) , 519-533. 533. doi:10.2147/CEOR.S527169 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/111649
Title
Cost-Utility Analysis of Metabolic Bariatric Surgery for Individuals with Obesity in Saudi Arabia
Corresponding Author(s)
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
Background: Metabolic bariatric surgery (MBS) is an effective and relatively safe intervention for managing obesity. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-utility of MBS compared with the standard treatment—lifestyle modification plus liraglutide—in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Methods: A Markov model was developed to estimate the lifetime costs and outcomes of MBS. Costs and outcomes were discounted at an annual rate of 3%. The analysis was conducted from societal and healthcare system perspectives, using a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of one to three times the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita per quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained. Direct medical and nonmedical costs were obtained from hospital records and patient surveys, respectively. Transitional probabilities and utility values were obtained from published literature and primary data collection in the KSA. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess parameter uncertainty. Results: Over a lifetime horizon, MBS yielded 0.38 incremental QALY and US$ 11,975 (Saudi Riyal [SAR] 44,905; purchasing power parity [PPP] 23,911) incremental costs, leading to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of US$ 31,909 (SAR 119,660; PPP 63,717) per QALY gained from a societal perspective and US$ 36,353 (SAR 136,324); PPP 72,590) from a healthcare system perspective. The model was most sensitive to the discount rates of costs and outcomes and the direct medical costs associated with MBS. At a WTP threshold of one GDP per capita (US$ 30,436; SAR 114,135; PPP 60,775), the standard treatment had a 63% probability of being cost-effective. However, at a threshold of approximately 1.8 GDP per capita (US$ 56,000; SAR 210,000; PPP 111,821), MBS was cost-effective in 100% of the iterations. Conclusion: MBS is a cost-effective intervention compared with standard treatment in the context of the KSA. Efforts should be made to expand earlier and equitable access to MBS for individuals with a BMI > 40 kg/m<sup>2</sup> without comorbidities across the country.