Incorporating external effects in economic evaluation: The case of smoking

This thesis was submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy and awarded by Brunel University.The aim of this thesis is to explore methods to incorporate external effects on decision making of public health programmes in a UK setting, using smoking cessation as an example. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) methodological guidance for evaluating public health programmes is missing the incorporation of external effects. Therefore there is a need for considering their incorporation in such evaluations and to assess what are the appropiate methods to do so. Smoking cessation is an example where epidemiological evidence of external effects exists but has not generally been incorporated into economic evaluation. This thesis therefore focused in measuring the impact, in terms of costs and QALYs lost, of the incorporation of passive smoking, smoking during pregnancy and transmission of smoking behavior into economic evaluation of smoking cessation programmes previously developed to inform policy. A static Markov model is used to incorporate passive smoking and smoking during pregnancy, whereas transmisison of smoking behaviour is incorporated through a dynamic model. The findings show that some external effects can be incorporated without a system dynamic model, when this does occur, a static Markov model may be used to account for external effects in economic evaluation. Sometimes, to incorporate external effects, the model needs a change of population. Because smoking cessation interventions are generally highly cost-effective, the incorporation of external effects does not appear to change policy decisions, but there is a clear impact on the magnitude of the ICER. Passive smoking and smoking during pregnancy have higher impact in terms of costs and QALYs lost than transmission of smoking behaviour. Our discussion considers the validity of the methods used; how much the decision making process would be affected considering or not external effects on economic evaluation of smoking cessation interventions; and other valuation approaches for external effects, such as contingent valuation

Cost-effectiveness of Alzheimer's disease CSF biomarkers and amyloid-PET in early-onset cognitive impairment diagnosis

This study aimed at determining the cost-effectiveness of amyloid-positron emission tomography (PET) compared to Alzheimer's disease (AD) cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers (amyloid-?42, total-Tau and phosphorylated-Tau) for the diagnosis of AD in patients with early-onset cognitive impairment. A decision tree model using a national health care perspective was developed to compare the costs and effectiveness associated with Amyloid-PET and AD CSF biomarkers. Available evidence from the literature and primary data from Hospital Clínic de Barcelona were used to inform the model and calculate the efficiency of these diagnostic alternatives. Medical visits and diagnostic procedures were considered and reported in €2020. We calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio to measure the cost per % of correct diagnoses detected and we perform one-way deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to assess the uncertainty of these results. Compared with AD CSF biomarkers, Amyloid-PET resulted in 7.40% more correctly diagnosed cases of AD, with an incremental total mean cost of €146,854.80 per 100 cases. We found a 50% of probability that Amyloid-PET was cost-effective for a willingness to pay (WTP) of €19,840.39 per correct case detected. Using a WTP of €75,000, the probability that it is cost-effective reached a maximum of 76.9%, thus leading to a conclusion that Amyloid-PET is not a cost-effective technique compared to AD CSF biomarkers, unless the funder is willing to pay a minimum of €19,840.39 to detect one more correct case. Furthermore, obtaining CSF provides simultaneous information on amyloid ? and tau biomarkers and allows other biomarkers to be analyzed at a relatively low cost.© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany

Herramienta de retorno de la inversión en control del tabaquismo: ¿qué opinan aquellos que toman decisiones?

ResumenIntroducciónEl Proyecto Europeo EQUIPT pretende adaptar una herramienta de retorno de la inversión en tabaco para varios países, con el fin de proporcionar información sobre el retorno de invertir en estrategias y justificar la toma de decisiones. El objetivo de este estudio es identificar las necesidades de los usuarios en España para documentar la transferibilidad de la herramienta.MétodosEntrevistas telefónicas con actores relevantes sobre la implementación de la Herramienta EQUIPT, intención de uso y estrategias de control del tabaco.ResultadosLa herramienta puede añadir valor a la información utilizada al tomar decisiones y abogar por políticas coste-efectivas. Como inconvenientes, conocer cómo funcionará la herramienta, así como la formación y el tiempo que requerirá la consistencia y los cálculos internos.ConclusiónSe recogen conocimientos e ideas de los potenciales usuarios para ayudar a adaptar la Herramienta EQUIPT, de modo que proporcione ayuda en la toma de decisiones eficientes.AbstractIntroductionThe European EQUIPT study will co-create a return on investment tool in several countries, aiming to provide decision makers with information and justification on the returns that can be generated by investing in tobacco control. This study aimed to identify the needs of potential users in Spain in order to provide information on the transferability of the tool.MethodsTelephone interviews with stakeholders were conducted including questions about the implementation of the tool, intended use and tobacco control interventions.ResultsImplementing the tool could provide added value to the information used in decision-making to advocate for cost-effective policies. The main drawback would be the training and time needed to learn how the tool works and for internal calculations.ConclusionKnowledge and ideas from potential users collected in this study could inform the EQUIPT Tool adaptation. Thus, stakeholders could have an instrument that assists them on making healthcare decisions

EQUIPT: protocol of a comparative effectiveness research study evaluating cross-context transferability of economic evidence on tobacco control

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial.This article has been made available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund.Tobacco smoking claims 700 000 lives every year in Europe and the cost of tobacco smoking in the EU is estimated between €98 and €130 billion annually; direct medical care costs and indirect costs such as workday losses each represent half of this amount. Policymakers all across Europe are in need of bespoke information on the economic and wider returns of investing in evidence-based tobacco control, including smoking cessation agendas. EQUIPT is designed to test the transferability of one such economic evidence base-the English Tobacco Return on Investment (ROI) tool-to other EU member states

Health and economic impact at a population level of both primary and secondary preventive lung cancer interventions: A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis

Objectives: Robust economic evaluations are needed to identify efficient strategies for lung cancer prevention that combine brief and intensive smoking cessation intervention programmes with screening using low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) at different ages, frequencies, and coverages. We aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation approaches combined with lung cancer screening in the European context at a population level from a societal perspective. Materials and methods: A microsimulation model that describes the natural history of lung cancer and incorporates several prevention strategies was developed. Discounted lifetime QALYs and costs at a rate of 3% were used to calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, defined as additional costs in 2017 Euros per QALY gained. Results: Smoking cessation interventions reduce the incidence of lung cancer by 8%-46% and are consistently more effective and cost-effective when starting at younger ages. Screening reduces lung cancer mortality by 1%-24% and is generally less effective and more costly than smoking cessation interventions. The most cost-effective strategy would be to implement intensive smoking cessation interventions at ages 35, 40 and 45, combined with screening every three years between the ages of 55 and 65. Conclusions: Combining smoking cessation interventions with LDCT screening is a very attractive prevention strategy that substantially diminishes the burden of lung cancer. These combined prevention strategies, especially when providing several intensive interventions for smoking cessation at early ages, are more cost-effective than both approaches separately and allow for a more intensified LDCT without losing efficiency

Measuring the effects on quality of life and alcohol consumption of a program to reduce binge drinking in Spanish adolescents

Andalusian Public Foundation; Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (MINECO)

Increasing Cervical Cancer Screening Coverage: A Randomised, Community-based Clinical Trial

Background: Opportunistic cervical cancer screening can lead to suboptimal screening coverage. Coverage could be increased after a personalised invitation to the target population. We present a community randomized intervention study with three strategies aiming to increase screening coverage. Methods: The CRICERVA study is a community-based clinical trial to improve coverage of population-based screening in the Cerdanyola SAP area in Barcelona. A total of 32,858 women residing in the study area, aged 30 to 70 years were evaluated. A total of 15,965 women were identified as having no registration of a cervical cytology in the last 3.5 years within the Public Health data base system. Eligible women were assigned to one of four community randomized intervention groups (IGs): (1) (IG1 N = 4197) personalised invitation letter, (2) (IG2 N = 3601) personalised invitation letter + informative leaflet, (3) (IG3 N = 6088) personalised invitation letter + informative leaflet + personalised phone call and (4) (Control N = 2079) based on spontaneous demand of cervical cancer screening as officially recommended. To evaluate screening coverage, we used heterogeneity tests to compare impact of the interventions and mixed logistic regression models to assess the age effect. We refer a "rescue" visit as the screening visit resulting from the study invitation. Results: Among the 13,886 women in the IGs, 2,862 were evaluated as having an adequate screening history after the initial contact; 4,263 were lost to follow-up and 5,341 were identified as having insufficient screening and thus being eligible for a rescue visit. All intervention strategies significantly increased participation to screening compared to the control group. Coverage after the intervention reached 84.1% while the control group reached 64.8%. The final impact of our study was an increase of 20% in the three IGs and of 9% in the control group (p<0.001). Within the intervention arms, age was an important determinant of rescue visits showing a statistical interaction with the coverage attained in the IGs. Within the intervention groups, final screening coverage was significantly higher in IG3 (84.4%) (p< 0.001). However, the differences were more substantial in the age groups 50-59 and those 60+. The highest impact of the IG3 intervention was observed among women 60+ y.o with 32.0% of them being rescued for screening. The lowest impact of the interventions was in younger women. Conclusions: The study confirms that using individual contact methods and assigning a fixed screening date notably increases participation in screening. The response to the invitation is strongly dependent on age

Guía y recomendaciones para la realización y presentación de evaluaciones económicas y análisis de impacto presupuestario de medicamentos en el ámbito del CatSalut

Avaluació econòmica de medicaments; Anàlisi d'impacte pressupostari; Catalunya; Economic evaluation of drugs; Budget impact analysis; Catalonia; Evaluación económica de medicamentos; Análisis de impacto presupuestario; CataluñaL'objectiu general d'aquesta Guia consisteix a presentar una proposta de recomanacions que haurien de seguir les avaluacions econòmiques (AE) i les anàlisis d'impacte pressupostari (AIP) de medicaments del Servei Català de la Salut (CatSalut).El objetivo general de esta Guía consiste en presentar una propuesta de recomendaciones que deberían seguir las evaluaciones económicas (EE) y los análisis de impacto presupuestario (AIP) de medicamentos del Servei Català de la Salut (CatSalut)

Changing current practice in urology: Improving guideline development and implementation through stakeholder engagement

Effective stakeholder integration for guideline development should improve outcomes and adherence to clinical practice guidelines