The cost to society of smoking cessation

FCTC ratification, smoking prevalence, and GDP per capita: lessons for Indonesia and the rest of the world

BACKGROUND

Indonesia's stagnated progress towards tobacco control could be addressed through the implementation of a comprehensive national framework, such as the World Health Organization's (WHO) Framework Convention of Tobacco Control (FCTC). However, national tobacco industry supporters argue that accepting the FCTC will have negative economic implications for the country. These arguments have, thus far, discouraged the Indonesian government from ratifying the FCTC. Drawing from an analysis of the impact of the FCTC on other countries' smoking rates and Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita, this study offers empirical evidence against industry arguments concerning the potential negative economic impacts of FCTC adoption. This study applies a two stage least square estimation strategy to unbalanced panel data at country level. In the first stage we estimate the impact of FCTC ratification on smoking rates, and in the second step, we estimate the influence of smoking activity on macroeconomic performance.

RESULTS

The result of this study shows that FCTC ratification has a negative impact on a country's smoking prevalence. While FCTC ratification positively correlates with reduced smoking prevalence, a decline in smoking prevalence is not related to a decline in GDP per capita.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study shows that FCTC ratification, which can be an important driver for more effective tobacco control, does not necessarily have a negative impact on the economy. Instead, FCTC ratification may be beneficial for both health and economic outcomes, as it provides comprehensive guidance for reducing smoking prevalence that take into account social and economic factors.

The Impact on Mortality and Societal Costs From Smoking Cessation in Aesthetic Plastic Surgery in the United States

BACKGROUND

It is common practice to require patients to stop smoking prior to elective plastic surgery procedures. Scarce research exists describing the impact on mortality and associated societal cost savings with regard to smoking cessation in aesthetic surgery.

OBJECTIVES

Our objective is to demonstrate that smoking cessation in anticipation for aesthetic surgery significantly reduces mortality and increases societal cost savings.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature review of 5 common aesthetic procedures (reduction mammaplasty, breast augmentation, facelift, rhinoplasty, and abdominoplasty) to determine patient smoking rates and subsequent recidivism. Sensitivity analyses estimated life years saved using ranges of recidivism from our literature review and assessed total lifetime savings, including direct and productivity costs, while adjusting for inflation (3%) and interest (5%). One life saved was equated to 45 life years saved.

RESULTS

Between May 2008 and May 2013, 7867 patients stopped smoking prior to undergoing aesthetic plastic surgery procedures. Assuming a reported recidivism rate of 68%, smoking cessation prior to aesthetic plastic surgery is associated with 429 lives saved and a total lifetime savings of $524.4 million over the five-year period. Total lives saved ranged from 214 (84% recidivism) to 885 (34% recidivism), and total lifetime cost savings ranged from $262.2 million (84% recidivism) to $1.08 billion (34% recidivism).

CONCLUSIONS

Presently, smoking cessation before aesthetic surgery significantly saves patient lives with yearly $104.9 million of societal cost savings in the United States. Future reductions in the presently high recidivism rate would lead to additional lives saved and reduced societal costs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

The Economic Impact of Smoking and of Reducing Smoking Prevalence: Review of Evidence

BACKGROUND

Tobacco smoking is the cause of many preventable diseases and premature deaths in the UK and around the world. It poses enormous health- and non-health-related costs to the affected individuals, employers, and the society at large. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that, globally, smoking causes over US$500 billion in economic damage each year.

OBJECTIVES

This paper examines global and UK evidence on the economic impact of smoking prevalence and evaluates the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of smoking cessation measures.

STUDY SELECTION

SEARCH METHODS We used two major health care/economic research databases, namely PubMed and the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) database that contains the British National Health Service (NHS) Economic Evaluation Database; Cochrane Library of systematic reviews in health care and health policy; and other health-care-related bibliographic sources. We also performed hand searching of relevant articles, health reports, and white papers issued by government bodies, international health organizations, and health intervention campaign agencies. SELECTION CRITERIA The paper includes cost-effectiveness studies from medical journals, health reports, and white papers published between 1992 and July 2014, but included only eight relevant studies before 1992. Most of the papers reviewed reported outcomes on smoking prevalence, as well as the direct and indirect costs of smoking and the costs and benefits of smoking cessation interventions. We excluded papers that merely described the effectiveness of an intervention without including economic or cost considerations. We also excluded papers that combine smoking cessation with the reduction in the risk of other diseases. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS The included studies were assessed against criteria indicated in the Cochrane Reviewers Handbook version 5.0.0. OUTCOMES ASSESSED IN THE REVIEWPrimary outcomes of the selected studies are smoking prevalence, direct and indirect costs of smoking, and the costs and benefits of smoking cessation interventions (eg, "cost per quitter", "cost per life year saved", "cost per quality-adjusted life year gained," "present value" or "net benefits" from smoking cessation, and "cost savings" from personal health care expenditure).

MAIN RESULTS

The main findings of this study are as follows: The costs of smoking can be classified into direct, indirect, and intangible costs. About 15% of the aggregate health care expenditure in high-income countries can be attributed to smoking. In the US, the proportion of health care expenditure attributable to smoking ranges between 6% and 18% across different states. In the UK, the direct costs of smoking to the NHS have been estimated at between £2.7 billion and £5.2 billion, which is equivalent to around 5% of the total NHS budget each year. The economic burden of smoking estimated in terms of GDP reveals that smoking accounts for approximately 0.7% of China's GDP and approximately 1% of US GDP. As part of the indirect (non-health-related) costs of smoking, the total productivity losses caused by smoking each year in the US have been estimated at US$151 billion.The costs of smoking notwithstanding, it produces some potential economic benefits. The economic activities generated from the production and consumption of tobacco provides economic stimulus. It also produces huge tax revenues for most governments, especially in high-income countries, as well as employment in the tobacco industry. Income from the tobacco industry accounts for up to 7.4% of centrally collected government revenue in China. Smoking also yields cost savings in pension payments from the premature death of smokers.Smoking cessation measures could range from pharmacological treatment interventions to policy-based measures, community-based interventions, telecoms, media, and technology (TMT)-based interventions, school-based interventions, and workplace interventions.The cost per life year saved from the use of pharmacological treatment interventions ranged between US$128 and US$1,450 and up to US$4,400 per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) saved. The use of pharmacotherapies such as varenicline, NRT, and Bupropion, when combined with GP counseling or other behavioral treatment interventions (such as proactive telephone counseling and Web-based delivery), is both clinically effective and cost effective to primary health care providers.Price-based policy measures such as increase in tobacco taxes are unarguably the most effective means of reducing the consumption of tobacco. A 10% tax-induced cigarette price increase anywhere in the world reduces smoking prevalence by between 4% and 8%. Net public benefits from tobacco tax, however, remain positive only when tax rates are between 42.9% and 91.1%. The cost effectiveness ratio of implementing non-price-based smoking cessation legislations (such as smoking restrictions in work places, public places, bans on tobacco advertisement, and raising the legal age of smokers) range from US$2 to US$112 per life year gained (LYG) while reducing smoking prevalence by up to 30%-82% in the long term (over a 50-year period).Smoking cessation classes are known to be most effective among community-based measures, as they could lead to a quit rate of up to 35%, but they usually incur higher costs than other measures such as self-help quit-smoking kits. On average, community pharmacist-based smoking cessation programs yield cost savings to the health system of between US$500 and US$614 per LYG.Advertising media, telecommunications, and other technology-based interventions (such as TV, radio, print, telephone, the Internet, PC, and other electronic media) usually have positive synergistic effects in reducing smoking prevalence especially when combined to deliver smoking cessation messages and counseling support. However, the outcomes on the cost effectiveness of TMT-based measures have been inconsistent, and this made it difficult to attribute results to specific media. The differences in reported cost effectiveness may be partly attributed to varying methodological approaches including varying parametric inputs, differences in national contexts, differences in advertising campaigns tested on different media, and disparate levels of resourcing between campaigns. Due to its universal reach and low implementation costs, online campaign appears to be substantially more cost effective than other media, though it may not be as effective in reducing smoking prevalence.School-based smoking prevalence programs tend to reduce short-term smoking prevalence by between 30% and 70%. Total intervention costs could range from US$16,400 to US$580,000 depending on the scale and scope of intervention. The cost effectiveness of school-based programs show that one could expect a saving of approximately between US$2,000 and US$20,000 per QALY saved due to averted smoking after 2-4 years of follow-up.Workplace-based interventions could represent a sound economic investment to both employers and the society at large, achieving a benefit-cost ratio of up to 8.75 and generating 12-month employer cost savings of between $150 and $540 per nonsmoking employee. Implementing smoke-free workplaces would also produce myriads of new quitters and reduce the amount of cigarette consumption, leading to cost savings in direct medical costs to primary health care providers. Workplace interventions are, however, likely to yield far greater economic benefits over the long term, as reduced prevalence will lead to a healthier and more productive workforce.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that the direct costs and externalities to society of smoking far outweigh any benefits that might be accruable at least when considered from the perspective of socially desirable outcomes (ie, in terms of a healthy population and a productive workforce). There are enormous differences in the application and economic measurement of smoking cessation measures across various types of interventions, methodologies, countries, economic settings, and health care systems, and these may have affected the comparability of the results of the studies reviewed. However, on the balance of probabilities, most of the cessation measures reviewed have not only proved effective but also cost effective in delivering the much desired cost savings and net gains to individuals and primary health care providers.

An analysis of the economic impact of smoking cessation in Europe

BACKGROUND

There is much evidence that smoking cessation interventions are both clinically and cost effective but these results relate only to the specific study populations involved in the studies. The present study aimed to compare and contrast results obtained when the effects of smoking cessation are modelled for several different European countries.

METHODS

Local investigators collected data relating to several smoking related diseases. Costs and disease rates were then modelled up to 2030 for reductions in smoking of 3%, 15% and 30% using an epidemiological modelling tool, PREVENT.

RESULTS

Models could not be constructed for some countries due to lack of data while for others substantial amounts of data had to be imputed. In all cases, disease rates fall when smoking cessation occurs. Overall costs initially fall before eventually rising as lives are saved and the population ages, leading to negative savings in some cases by the end of the modelled period. The speed and magnitude with which these effects occur are diverse for different countries.

CONCLUSIONS

Health and economic results for different countries vary significantly for the same reductions in smoking. This suggests that it may be inappropriate to assume that evidence from one country will produce similar health and economic effects if the same levels of smoking cessation were achieved in another country which has evident messages for health policy. Problems with obtaining data also highlight the difficulties associated with modelling such scenarios and underline the need for relevant data to be routinely collected in all countries.

Smoking and absence from work: systematic review and meta-analysis of occupational studies

AIMS

This study aimed to assess the association between smoking and absenteeism in working adults.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed by electronic database searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CAB Abstracts, PubMed, Science Direct and National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (February 2012). Longitudinal, prospective cohorts or retrospective cohorts were included in the review. Summary effect estimates were calculated using random-effects meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was assessed by I(2) and publication bias was investigated.

RESULTS

A total of 29 longitudinal or cohort studies were included. Compared with non-smokers, current smokers had a 33% increase in risk of absenteeism [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.25-1.41; I(2)  = 62.7%; 17 studies]. Current smokers were absent for an average of 2.74 more days per year compared with non-smokers (95% CI: 1.54-3.95; I(2)  = 89.6%; 13 studies). Compared with never smokers, ex-smokers had a 14% increase in risk of absenteeism (95% CI: 1.08-1.21; I(2)  = 62.4%; eight studies); however, no increase in duration of absence could be detected. Current smokers also had a 19% increase in risk of absenteeism compared with ex-smokers (95% CI: 1.09-1.32, P < 0.01, eight studies). There was no evidence of publication bias. The total cost of absenteeism due to smoking in the United Kingdom was estimated to be £1.4 billion in 2011.

CONCLUSIONS

Quitting smoking appears to reduce absenteeism and result in substantial cost-savings for employers.

Repeated tobacco-use screening and intervention in clinical practice: health impact and cost effectiveness

BACKGROUND

This report updates 2001 estimates of disease burden prevented and cost effectiveness of tobacco-use screening and brief intervention relative to that of other clinical preventive services. It also addresses repeated counseling because the literature has focused on single episodes of treatment, while in reality that is neither desirable nor likely.

METHODS

Literature searches led to four models for calculating the clinically preventable burden of deaths and morbidity from smoking as well as the cost effectiveness of providing the service annually over time. The same methods were used in similar calculations for other preventive services to facilitate comparison.

RESULTS

Using methods consistent with existing literature for this service, an estimated 190,000 undiscounted quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) are saved at a cost of $1100 per QALY saved (discounted). These estimates exclude financial savings from smoking-attributable disease prevented and use the average 12-month quit rate in clinical practice for tobacco screening and brief cessation counseling with cessation medications (5.0%) and without (2.4%). Including the savings of prevented smoking-attributable disease and using the effectiveness of repeated interventions over the lifetime of smokers (23.1%), 2.47 million QALYs are saved at a cost savings of $500 per smoker who receives the service.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis makes repeated clinical tobacco-cessation counseling one of the three most important and cost-effective preventive services that can be provided in medical practice. Greater efforts are needed to achieve more of this potential value by increasing current low levels of performance.

A model for cost-effectiveness analyses of smoking cessation interventions applied to a Quit-and-Win contest for mothers of small children

AIMS

The first aim of this study was to develop a model that predicts health and economic consequences of smoking cessation in Sweden, striving to follow the methodological recommendations to reflect the societal perspective and to use the health measure quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The second aim was to apply the model estimates to a smoking cessation intervention.

METHODS

A Markov cost-effectiveness model was developed on smoking-related lung cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and cardiovascular disease. Swedish primary data on medical treatment costs and quality-of-life weights were used, supplemented with secondary data on other societal effects and the disease and death risks. The model simulations were applied to a "Quit-and-Win" contest for mothers of pre-school children. In total, 238 women participated, with 34 sustained tobacco-free at 12-month follow-up.

RESULTS

The cost-effectiveness model estimates a gain of 0.34 to 0.55 QALYs (discounted 3%), and cost savings of SEK 20-35,000 per female quitter in the age range 15 to 49 years. The cost-effectiveness analyses of the intervention showed intervention costs per quitter of SEK 7,850, and intervention costs per life-years saved (YLS) (discounted 3%) of SEK 13,200. The cost-utility analysis demonstrated cost savings and a gain of 16 QALYs.

CONCLUSIONS

The cost-utility analysis estimated health gains and cost savings resulting from the "Quit-and-Win" contest. As the model estimates on the differences in societal cost between smokers and quitters are considerable, many tobacco control programmes would result in cost savings. The construction of an optimal mix of tobacco control policies, however, demands incremental calculations on a range of programmes.

NICE guidelines: the management, treatment and care of COPD

Over a year ago the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) commissioned national guidelines for managing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in both primary and secondary care. The resulting guidelines published earlier this year are the result of a systematic review of the evidence in the published literature and where this has not been available expert opinion has informed recommendations. The document makes over 200 recommendations for practice with seven key areas where it was felt that implementation of the recommendations would have the largest impact on the management of COPD. The result is a comprehensive document concentrating on the health aspects of COPD and the following article looks at the guidelines and concentrates on the seven priority areas.

Aims, design and methods of the Smoking and Nicotine Dependence Awareness and Screening (SNICAS) study

The objectives of the Smoking and Nicotine Dependence Awareness (SNICAS) study are to provide nationally representative data on the prevalence of smoking and smoking dependence of primary care patients and the frequency in which smoking cessation interventions are offered and provided in primary care. With the inclusion of both providers' (doctor) and patients' perspectives, the study also attempts to identify the needs and motivational status for smoking cessation as reported by the patients and as perceived by the doctor. The Smoking and Nicotine Dependence Awareness study uses a two-stage epidemiological design. Stage 1 consists of a pre-study characterization of a nationwide sample of 889 primary care doctors (conservative response rate: 50%). Stage 2 consists of a cross-sectional assessment of unselected consecutive patients (n = 28,707, conservative response rate: 52.8%) on the study's target day, by means of patient questionnaire and a structured clinical appraisal of each patient by the doctor. This paper provides an overview of the design and methods of the study, informs about sampling and response rates, and examines whether the study sample could be considered representative of German primary care doctors.

The human and financial costs of smoking

Smoking causes about 20% of United States adult deaths and numerous diseases. Health care for cancer, cardiovascular, and pulmonary diseases from smoking costs tens of billions of dollars per year. Yet those costs are likely far exceeded by costs from bereavement, lost productivity, pain and suffering, and health care for debilities from smoking. Though sometimes more difficult to precisely quantify than costs for fatalities, the lost productivity, suffering, or familial costs of smoking are often much larger, more immediate, and more understandable threats to smokers, their families, and society. This article summarizes qualitative and quantitative human and financial tolls from smoking. The tolls range from cigarette burns, to cigarette ignited fire disasters, to caring for dying smokers and replacing their financial and social contributions to their spouses, children, grandchildren, and the tax base. In the face of such costs, smoking cessation and prevention services are likely to be highly cost-effective.