Financial buy-in does not affect outcomes of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty: Retrospective cohort

Abstract

Background and study aims

Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is an effective treatment for obesity but typically is not covered by insurance. It is not known whether patients with financial investment in their endoscopic procedure are more likely to achieve and/or maintain weight loss as compared with those who have no financial buy-in. We aimed to compare treatment adherence and outcomes between patients paying out-of-pocket (OOP) and those who underwent ESG as part of any clinical trial where costs were covered by a study protocol (no payment; NP).

Patients and methods

Data were collected via retrospective chart review. One hundred sixty-four patients who had an ESG with at least 6 months of follow-up were included. Repeated measures with generalized linear model were used to evaluate weight loss at different time points after ESG and labs values at baseline and 1-year follow-up to assess for comorbidity improvement between cohorts. Compliance was evaluated by comparing exercise adherence rates.

Results

The pattern of weight loss and change in laboratory values was not different over time between the OOP group (n = 139) and NP group (n = 25). Patients lost an average of 14% (12.2–15.9) and 12.9% (9.3–16.5) of total body weight over all time points, respectively, in both groups (6, 12 and 24 months). Treatment adherence also did not differ between the groups.

Conclusions

Having “skin in the game” by paying for ESG OOP does not correlate with better outcomes or treatment adherence, which further supports broad insurance coverage for this procedure.

Keywords

Epidemiology

• References

• 1 Abu Dayyeh BK, Rajan E, Gostout CJ. Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty: a potential endoscopic alternative to surgical sleeve gastrectomy for treatment of obesity. Gastrointest Endosc 2013; 78: 530-535
• 2 Abu Dayyeh BK, Bazerbachi F, Vargas EJ. et al. Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty for treatment of class 1 and 2 obesity (MERIT): a prospective, multicentre, randomised trial. Lancet 2022; 400: 441-451
• 3 Beran A, Matar R, Jaruvongvanich V. et al. Comparative effectiveness and safety between endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a meta-analysis of 6775 individuals with obesity. Obes Surg 2022; 32: 3504-3512
• 4 Levine JA. Poverty and Obesity in the U.S. Diabetes 2011; 60: 2667-2668
• 5 Ard JD, Emery M, Cook M. et al. Skin in the game: Does paying for obesity treatment out of pocket lead to better outcomes compared to insurance coverage?. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2017; 25: 993-996
• 6 Fehervari M, Fadel MG, Alghazawi LOK. et al. Medium-term weight loss and remission of comorbidities following endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Obesity Surg 2023; 33: 3527-3538
• 7 Jannah N, Hild J, Gallagher C. et al. Coverage for obesity prevention and treatment services: analysis of Medicaid and state employee health insurance programs. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2018; 26: 1834-1840
• 8 Baig K, Dusetzina SB, Kim DD. et al. Medicare Part D coverage of antiobesity medications - Challenges and uncertainty ahead. N Engl J Med 2023; 388: 961-963
• 9 Haseeb M, Chhatwal J, Xiao J. et al. Semaglutide vs endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty for weight loss. JAMA Network Open 2024; 7: e246221-e
• 10 Puhl RM, Heuer CA. The stigma of obesity: a review and update. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2009; 17: 941-964
• 11 Woolford SJ, Clark SJ, Butchart A. et al. To pay or not to pay: public perception regarding insurance coverage of obesity treatment. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2013; 21: E709-E714
• 12 Puhl RM, Brownell KD. Confronting and coping with weight stigma: an investigation of overweight and obese adults. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2006; 14: 1802-1815
• 13 Mundi MS, Hurt RT, Phelan SM. et al. Associations between experience of early childhood trauma and impact on obesity status, health, as well as perceptions of obesity-related health care. Mayo Clin Proc 2021; 96: 408-419