Search

Background: Obesity is a major and growing public health concern. The associated cost for obesity and its related comorbidities is approximately 30% of US health care expenditures annually. As additional pharmacotherapeutic options join the market to combat obesity, it is important to understand the financial impact it may have on overall health care costs. This article explores the efficacy and pharmacoeconomics of incretin mimetics, semaglutide and tirzepatide, in the setting of obesity., Area of Uncertainty: The cost of incretin mimetics (semaglutide and tirzepatide) and its overall impact on obesity management within the health care arena is being explored. The cost comparison of these medications is to be determined; however, it may represent an added cost to the total US health care expenditures., Data Sources: A PubMed and Google Scholar search was conducted using various search terms (eg, semaglutide, tirzepatide, pharmacoeconomics, and obesity)., Therapeutic Advances: Based on the data reviewed, both semaglutide and tirzepatide are effective medication options for obesity management. Obesity-related management expenditures exceed $173 billion for the US health care system annually. The cost needed to treat for 1% of weight loss with semaglutide and tirzepatide was reported as $1845 and $985, respectively. More than 40% of adults (60 years or older) experience obesity. If 1%, 5%, or 10% of this population is treated with semaglutide, the annual Medicare costs will translate to excess of $2.6 billion, $13.3 billion, and $26.8 billion, respectively. Tirzepatide is not yet approved in the United States for obesity and its financial impact remains to be seen., Conclusions: Obesity is associated with burdensome health complications and costs. Semaglutide and tirzepatide are effective drug options for the management of obesity. The cost of these medications will no doubt present a challenge to the total health care expenditures, although the cost-benefit ratio may ultimately be favorable., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Restoration has been elevated as an important strategy to reverse the decline of coastal wetlands worldwide. Current practice in restoration science emphasizes minimizing competition between out-planted propagules to maximize planting success. This paradigm persists despite the fact that foundational theory in ecology demonstrates that positive species interactions are key to organism success under high physical stress, such as recolonization of bare substrate. As evidence of how entrenched this restoration paradigm is, our survey of 25 restoration organizations in 14 states in the United States revealed that >95% of these agencies assume minimizing negative interactions (i.e., competition) between outplants will maximize propagule growth. Restoration experiments in both Western and Eastern Atlantic salt marshes demonstrate, however, that a simple change in planting configuration (placing propagules next to, rather than at a distance from, each other) results in harnessing facilitation and increased yields by 107% on average. Thus, small adjustments in restoration design may catalyze untapped positive species interactions, resulting in significantly higher restoration success with no added cost. As positive interactions between organisms commonly occur in coastal ecosystems (especially in more physically stressful areas like uncolonized substrate) and conservation resources are limited, transformation of the coastal restoration paradigm to incorporate facilitation theory may enhance conservation efforts, shoreline defense, and provisioning of ecosystem services such as fisheries production.

Under DRG reimbursement it is essential that all operational costs be considered as targets for reduction. In this article, the author presents a methodology for determining whether to prepare radiopharmaceuticals in house or purchase them from a central radiopharmacy. By using this methodology, purchasing agents may find it possible to save up to 50% of the cost of radiopharmaceuticals.