A Review of Economic Evaluations of Tobacco Control Programs

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, Atlanta, GA 30341, USA.
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health (Impact Factor: 1.99). 02/2009; 6(1):51-68. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph6010051
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Each year, an estimated 443,000 people die of smoking-related diseases in the United States. Cigarette smoking results in more than $193 billion in medical costs and productivity losses annually. In an effort to reduce this burden, many states, the federal government, and several national organizations fund tobacco control programs and policies. For this report we reviewed existing literature on economic evaluations of tobacco control interventions. We found that smoking cessation therapies, including nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and self-help are most commonly studied. There are far fewer studies on other important interventions, such as price and tax increases, media campaigns, smoke free air laws and workplace smoking interventions, quitlines, youth access enforcement, school-based programs, and community-based programs. Although there are obvious gaps in the literature, the existing studies show in almost every case that tobacco control programs and policies are either cost-saving or highly cost-effective.

Download full-text


Available from: Bishwa Adhikari, May 07, 2014
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Smoking cessation is the single most effective behavioral change for disease prevention. While almost 20% of the US population smokes, 70% of these smokers indicate they would like to quit. However, only approximately 3-5% of smokers quit without the aid of some intervention. Best practice suggests that every patient who smokes is offered brief behavioral counseling with pharmacotherapy support for smoking cessation. The past decade has presented new pharmacotherapies for tobacco cessation that allow the clinician more options for individualizing therapy to maximize each patient's chance for tobacco abstinence. Nicotine replacement therapy, bupropion sustained release and varenicline are discussed as monotherapies and in combination. As the understanding of neuropharmacology increases and new pharmacotherapies are developed, there will be the possibility of tailoring therapies for individual patients based on genetic predispositions and other individual characteristics.
    Expert Review of Respiratory Medicine 10/2009; 3(5):475-85. DOI:10.1586/ers.09.42
  • Source
    The New Zealand medical journal 01/2010; 123(1326):7-18.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In 2006, Idaho and Kentucky became two of the first states to implement changes to their Medicaid programs under authority granted by the 2005 Deficit Reduction Act (DRA). The DRA granted new flexibility in the design of state Medicaid programs, including a state plan amendment (SPA) option for changes that previously would have required a waiver. This paper uses state Medicaid administrative data to analyze the impact of Medicaid policy changes implemented in these states through a series of SPAs in 2006 and 2007. Changes in utilization are examined for multiple services, including physician, dental, and ER visits, inpatient stays, and prescriptions, among non-elderly adult Medicaid recipients following changes in cost sharing, reimbursement, service delivery, and covered services. Where possible, enrollees not affected by the changes served as a comparison group. While relatively few adults in Idaho received a wellness exam after such coverage was added, the adoption of managed care for dental services was associated with increased receipt of dental care, including preventive care. The new limits on brand name prescriptions in Kentucky were associated with a reduction in the proportion of enrollees with two or more monthly name brand prescriptions while the small copayments introduced did not appear to have a dramatic impact. We find that changes in financial incentives on both the supply-side (such as reimbursement increases) and the demand-side (i.e., benefit changes) alone may not be enough to generate the desired levels of preventive care, especially among those with chronic health conditions.
    01/2012; 2(4). DOI:10.5600/mmrr.002.04.a05