Counting the cost of UK poverty

Part of the case for investing in programmes to reduce poverty is that it produces huge costs not just to those who experience it but to taxpayers who foot the bill for some of the consequences of poverty to society. In areas where poverty is high, public spending on things like health care, children's social services and criminal justice is increased. Moreover, people who have experienced poverty, especially in childhood, face disadvantages that reduce their chance of being in work and reduce their projected earnings when they do work, which means the Exchequer brings in less in taxes and pays out more in benefits. Counting these costs is not easy, but this report gives an estimate to illustrate that poverty costs the Exchequer huge amounts of money - amounting to £78 billion a year, or around four per cent of GDP

Schematic of the Markov model developed for this study.

<p>Schematic of the Markov model developed for this study.</p

Tornado plots of the univariate sensitivity analyses for the 3 scenarios.

<p>Note that the two VS approaches were similar to the same sets of inputs, so only the second (international referrals) is shown.</p

Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.

<p>Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves.</p

Transition probabilities used in the model.

<p>Transition probabilities used in the model.</p

Results of base case analysis.

<p>Results of base case analysis.</p

Ranking 93 health interventions for low- and middle-income countries by cost-effectiveness

<div><p>Background</p><p>Cost-effectiveness rankings of health interventions are useful inputs for national healthcare planning and budgeting. Previous comprehensive rankings for low- and middle- income countries were undertaken in 2005 and 2006, accompanying the development of strategies for the Millennium Development Goals. We update the rankings using studies published since 2000, as strategies are being considered for the Sustainable Development Goals.</p><p>Methods</p><p>Expert systematic searches of the literature were undertaken for a broad range of health interventions. Cost-effectiveness results using Disability Adjusted Life-Years (DALYs) as the health outcome were standardized to 2012 US dollars.</p><p>Results</p><p>149 individual studies of 93 interventions qualified for inclusion. Interventions for Reproductive, Maternal, Newborn and Child Health accounted for 37% of interventions, and major infectious diseases (AIDS, TB, malaria and neglected tropical diseases) for 24%, consistent with the priorities of the Millennium Development Goals. More than half of the interventions considered cost less than $200 per DALY and hence can be considered for inclusion in Universal Health Care packages even in low-income countries.</p><p>Discussion</p><p>Important changes have occurred in rankings since 2006. Priorities have changed as a result of new technologies, new methods for changing behavior, and significant price changes for some vaccines and drugs. Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals will require LMICs to study a broader range of health interventions, particularly in adult health. Some interventions are no longer studied, in some cases because they have become usual care, in other cases because they are no longer relevant. Updating cost-effectiveness rankings on a regular basis is potentially a valuable exercise.</p></div

Interventions for children.

<p>* denotes outcome in QALYs.</p

Interventions for adults costing $1000 or more per DALY averted.

<p>* denotes outcome in QALYs.</p

Interventions for adults costing less than $100 per DALY averted.

<p>Interventions for adults costing less than $100 per DALY averted.</p