Towards optimum smoking cessation interventions during pregnancy: a household model to explore cost-effectiveness

Equity in national healthcare economic evaluation guidelines: Essential or extraneous?

BACKGROUND

The focus on health maximisation in a healthcare economic evaluation (HEE) - that is health gains are of equal value regardless of the recipient- has significant implications as health systems attempt to address persistent and growing health inequities. This study aimed to systematically compare and contrast the equity principles of different health technology assessment (HTA) agencies and how equity is addressed in HEE guidelines.

METHODS

HTA agencies were identified through the ISPOR, GEAR, iDSI, HTAi, INAHTA, HTAsiaLink, and RedETSA websites in June 2021 and updated in August 2023. Agencies websites were then searched to retrieve HEE guidelines. The guidelines were grouped into two categories: well-established and newly-developed agency guidelines, based on whether or not they published their first guidelines before 2009. Data extracted summarised the methodological details in the reference cases, including specifics on how equity featured and in what role. In those agencies where equity did not feature explicitly in the HEE guidelines, an additional search of the agency website was undertaken to understand if equity featured in those agencies' decision-making frameworks.

RESULTS

The study included 46 guidelines from 51 countries. Only 30% of the guidelines were explicit about the equity assumptions. Health equity (using a broad definition) was mentioned in 29 guidelines and 14 included a specific definition while only seven recommended specific methods to incorporate inequalities. Addressing equity concerns was usually suggested as an additional analyses rather than a key part of the assessment. It was unclear how equity was incorporated into decision-making processes. In addition, equity was mentioned in other guidance - such as decision-making frameworks - provided by five agencies that did not mention it in the HEE guidelines, and 7 of 14 topic selection criteria that were identified.

CONCLUSION

Equity is given less attention than efficiency in HEE guidelines. This indicates that HTA agencies while subscribing to an extra-welfarist approach have a narrow evaluative space - focusing on maximising health and not considering the opportunity cost of the equity constraint. The omission of equity and the lack of systematic approaches in guidelines poses a threat to the international endeavours to reduce inequities. It is timely for HTA agencies to reconsider their positions on equity explicitly.

A scoping review of costing methodologies used to assess interventions for underserved pregnant people and new parents

BACKGROUND

Lack of evidence about the long-term economic benefits of interventions targeting underserved perinatal populations can hamper decision making regarding funding. To optimize the quality of future research, we examined what methods and costs have been used to assess the value of interventions targeting pregnant people and/or new parents who have poor access to healthcare.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review using methods described by Arksey and O'Malley. We conducted systematic searches in eight databases and web-searches for grey literature. Two researchers independently screened results to determine eligibility for inclusion. We included economic evaluations and cost analyses of interventions targeting pregnant people and/or new parents from underserved populations in twenty high income countries. We extracted and tabulated data from included publications regarding the study setting, population, intervention, study methods, types of costs included, and data sources for costs.

RESULTS

Final searches were completed in May 2024. We identified 103 eligible publications describing a range of interventions, most commonly home visiting programs (n = 19), smoking cessation interventions (n = 19), prenatal care (n = 11), perinatal mental health interventions (n = 11), and substance use treatment (n = 10), serving 36 distinct underserved populations. A quarter of the publications (n = 25) reported cost analyses only, while 77 were economic evaluations. Most publications (n = 82) considered health care costs, 45 considered other societal costs, and 14 considered only program costs. Only a third (n = 36) of the 103 included studies considered long-term costs that occurred more than one year after the birth (for interventions occurring only in pregnancy) or after the end of the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

A broad range of interventions targeting pregnant people and/or new parents from underserved populations have the potential to reduce health inequities in their offspring. Economic evaluations of such interventions are often at risk of underestimating the long-term benefits of these interventions because they do not consider downstream societal costs. Our consolidated list of downstream and long-term costs from existing research can inform future economic analyses of interventions targeting poorly served pregnant people and new parents. Comprehensively quantifying the downstream and long-term benefits of such interventions is needed to inform decision making that will improve health equity.

Supporting pregnant women not ready to quit smoking: an economic evaluation

OBJECTIVES

Some pregnant women are not ready or do not want to quit smoking completely, and currently there is no support provided for these women in the UK. Offering help to reduce smoking could reduce the health risks associated with smoking and increase the limited reach of the NHS Stop Smoking Services (SSS) for pregnant women. This study aimed to design and evaluate a hypothetical intervention aimed at pregnant women who are not yet ready or do not want to quit smoking entirely.

METHODS

A hypothetical intervention, the Reduced Smoking During Pregnancy (RSDP) intervention, was conceptualised based on the best available evidence. The intervention was evaluated, using a decision-analytic model developed for SDP interventions. Two different scenarios, a base-case and a cautious-case were developed, and a cost-utility analysis and return on investment analysis were conducted. The uncertainty around the estimates was assessed, using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

The RSDP intervention could prevent the loss of 13 foetuses and generate 43 quitters 1 year after delivery per 1000 women. In the lifetime analysis, the intervention was cost-effective in both scenarios, with an incremental cost of £363 (95% CI £29 to £672) and 0.44 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.53) QALYs gained in the base-case.

CONCLUSIONS

The study found that the hypothetical reduction intervention would produce significant health benefits, reduce smoking and be cost-effective. Offering pregnant smokers help to reduce smoking could reduce health inequalities, widen the reach of SSS and improve health. This economic evaluation of a novel, intensive intervention could inform the piloting of such interventions.