Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29532966›Full record

ArticleAddiction (Abingdon, England)2018

Cost-effectiveness of alternative smoking cessation scenarios in Spain: results from the EQUIPTMOD.

Marta Trapero-Bertran, Celia Muñoz, Kathryn Coyle, Doug Coyle, Adam Lester-George, Reiner Leidl, Bertalan Németh, Kei-Long Cheung, Subhash Pokhrel, Ángel Lopez-Nicolás

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Addiction (Abingdon, England), 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Marta Trapero-BertranCentre of Research in Economics and Health (CRES-UPF) University Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain.
Celia MuñozCentre of Research in Economics and Health (CRES-UPF) University Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain.
Kathryn CoyleHealth Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UK.
Doug CoyleHealth Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UK.
Adam Lester-GeorgeLeLan (Ltd) Solutions, Bristol, UK.
Reiner LeidlInstitute of Health Economics and Health Care Management, Helmholtz Zentrum München (GmbH) - German Research Center for Environmental Health, Comprehensive Pneumology Center Munich (CPC-M), Member of the German Center for Lung Research (DZL), Neuherberg, Germany.
Bertalan NémethFaculty of Social Sciences, Department of Health Policy and Health Economics, Eötvös Loránd University, and Syreon Research Institute, Budapest, Hungary.
Kei-Long CheungCaphri School of Public Health and Primary Care, Health Services Research, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Subhash PokhrelHealth Economics Research Group, Institute of Environment, Health and Societies, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UK.
Ángel Lopez-NicolásCentre of Research in Economics and Health (CRES-UPF) University Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo assess the cost-effectiveness of alternative smoking cessation scenarios from the perspective of the Spanish National Health Service (NHS).

designWe used the European study on Quantifying Utility of Investment in Protection from Tobacco model (EQUIPTMOD), a Markov-based state transition economic model, to estimate the return on investment (ROI) of: (a) the current provision of smoking cessation services (brief physician advice and printed self-helped material + smoking ban and tobacco duty at current levels); and (b) four alternative scenarios to complement the current provision: coverage of proactive telephone calls; nicotine replacement therapy (mono and combo) [prescription nicotine replacement therapy (Rx NRT)]; varenicline (standard duration); or bupropion. A rate of 3% was used to discount life-time costs and benefits.

settingSpain.

participantsAdult smoking population (16+ years). MEASUREMENTS: Health-care costs associated with treatment of smoking attributable diseases (lung cancer, coronary heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary infection and stroke); intervention costs; quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Costs and outcomes were summarized using various ROI estimates.

findingsThe cost of implementing the current provision of smoking cessation services is approximately €61 million in the current year. This translates to 18 quitters per 1000 smokers and a life-time benefit-cost ratio of 5, compared with no such provision. All alternative scenarios were dominant (cost-saving: less expensive to run and generated more QALYs) from the life-time perspective, compared with the current provision. The life-time benefit-cost ratios were: 1.87 (proactive telephone calls); 1.17 (Rx NRT); 2.40 (varenicline-standard duration); and bupropion (2.18). The results remained robust in the sensitivity analysis.

conclusionsAccording to the EQUIPTMOD modelling tool it would be cost-effective for the Spanish authorities to expand the reach of existing GP brief interventions for smoking cessation, provide pro-active telephone support, and reimburse smoking cessation medication to smokers trying to stop. Such policies would more than pay for themselves in the long run.

Indexed as

Models, EconomicAdultCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansSmokingSmoking CessationSpainCost-effectivenesseconomic evaluationEQUIPTsmoking cessation interventionsSpaintobacco control

Identifiers

PMID29532966
PMCPMC6032934

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.