METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and EMBASE were searched for randomized trials comparing pharmacologic or surgical obesity interventions to usual care, placebo, or no treatment in adults with OSA. The association between percentage weight loss and AHI change between randomization and last follow-up was evaluated using meta-regression.
PROSPERO: CRD42022378853.
RESULTS: Ten eligible trials (n = 854 patients) were included. Four (n = 211) assessed bariatric surgery, and 6 (n = 643) assessed pharmacologic interventions over a median follow-up of 13 months (interquartile range 6-26 months). The linear best estimate of the change in AHI is 0.45 events per hour (95% Confidence Interval 0.18 to 0.73 events per hour) for every 1% body weight lost.
CONCLUSIONS: Weight loss caused by medication or surgery caused a proportionate improvement of the AHI. Providers could consider extrapolating from this relationship when advising patients of the expected effects of other pharmacologic or surgical interventions without direct evidence in OSA.
METHODS: We conducted a cost-utility analysis using a Markov model to simulate lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of Thai smokers aged ≥35 years receiving smoking cessation services offered from FAHSAI Clinic or usual care over a horizon of 50 years. The model used a 6-month continuous abstinence rate from a multicenter prospective study of 24 FAHSAI Clinics. A series of sensitivity analyses including probabilistic sensitivity analysis were conducted to assess robustness of study findings. Cost data are presented in US$ for 2020.
RESULTS: The FAHSAI Clinic was dominant as it was less costly ($9537.92 vs $10964.19) and more effective (6.06 vs 5.96 QALYs) compared with usual care over the 50-year time horizon. Changes in risks of stroke and coronary heart disease among males had the largest impact on the cost-effectiveness findings. The probability that FAHSAI Clinic was cost-effective was 99.8% at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $5120.
CONCLUSIONS: The FAHSAI Clinic smoking cessation program was clinically superior and cost-saving compared to usual care for Thai patients with CVD in all scenarios. A budget impact analysis is needed to estimate the financial impact of adopting this program within the Thai healthcare system.