Cost-effectiveness Of Smoking Cessation Interventions Research Articles

Study protocol of an economic evaluation embedded in the Midwives and Obstetricians Helping Mothers to Quit Smoking (MOHMQuit) trial

BackgroundTobacco smoking during pregnancy is the most important preventable risk factor for pregnancy complications and adverse birth outcomes and can have lifelong consequences for infants. Smoking during pregnancy is associated with higher healthcare costs related to birth complications and during childhood. Psychosocial interventions to support pregnant women to quit are effective, yet provision of smoking cessation support has been inconsistent. The Midwives and Obstetricians Helping Mothers to Quit Smoking (MOHMQuit) intervention provides systems change, and leadership and clinician elements, to support clinicians to help women stop smoking in pregnancy. There have been few long-term analyses conducted of the cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions for pregnant women that target healthcare providers. This protocol describes the economic evaluation of the MOHMQuit trial, a pragmatic stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled implementation trial in nine public maternity services in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, to ascertain whether MOHMQuit is cost-effective in supporting clinicians to help women quit smoking in pregnancy compared to usual care.MethodsTwo primary analyses will be carried out comparing MOHMQuit with usual care from an Australian health care system perspective: i) a within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis with results presented as the incremental cost per additional quitter; and ii) a lifetime cost-utility analysis using a published probabilistic decision analytic Markov model with results presented as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for mother and child. Patient-level data on resource use and outcomes will be used in the within-trial analysis and extrapolated and supplemented with national population statistics and published data from the literature for the lifetime analysis.DiscussionThere is increasing demand for information on the cost-effectiveness of implementing healthcare interventions to provide policy makers with critical information for the best value for money within finite budgets. Economic evaluation of the MOHMQuit trial will provide essential, policy-relevant information for decision makers on the value of evidence-based implementation of support for healthcare providers delivering services for pregnant women.Trial registrationsACTRN12622000167763, registered 2 February 2022.

Cost-Effectiveness of Smoking Cessation Interventions in Patients With Ischemic Stroke and Transient Ischemic Attack.

Smoking cessation rates after stroke and transient ischemic attack are suboptimal, and smoking cessation interventions are underutilized. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of smoking cessation interventions in this population. We constructed a decision tree and used Markov models that aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of varenicline, any pharmacotherapy with intensive counseling, and monetary incentives, compared with brief counseling alone in the secondary stroke prevention setting. Payer and societal costs of interventions and outcomes were modeled. The outcomes were recurrent stroke, myocardial infarction, and death using a lifetime horizon. Estimates and variance for the base case (35% cessation), costs and effectiveness of interventions, and outcome rates were imputed from the stroke literature. We calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and incremental net monetary benefits. An intervention was considered cost-effective if the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was less than the willingness-to-pay threshold of $100 000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) or when the incremental net monetary benefit was positive. Probabilistic Monte Carlo simulations modeled the impact of parameter uncertainty. From the payer perspective, varenicline and pharmacotherapy with intensive counseling were associated with more QALYs (0.67 and 1.00, respectively) at less total lifetime costs compared with brief counseling alone. Monetary incentives were associated with 0.71 more QALYs at an additional cost of $120 compared with brief counseling alone, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $168/QALY. From the societal perspective, all 3 interventions provided more QALYs at less total costs compared with brief counseling alone. In 10 000 Monte Carlo simulations, all 3 smoking cessation interventions were cost-effective in >89% of runs. For secondary stroke prevention, it is cost-effective and potentially cost-saving to deliver smoking cessation therapy beyond brief counseling alone.

Cost-Effectiveness of a Telephone-Based Smoking Cessation Randomized Trial in the Lung Cancer Screening Setting.

BackgroundThere are limited data on the cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions in lung cancer screening settings. We conducted an economic analysis embedded in a national randomized trial of 2 telephone counseling cessation interventions.MethodsWe used a societal perspective to compare the short-term cost per 6-month bio-verified quit and long-term cost-effectiveness of the interventions. Trial data were used to micro-cost intervention delivery, and the data were extended to a lifetime horizon using an established Cancer Intervention Surveillance and Modeling Network lung cancer model. We modeled the impact of screening accompanied by 8 weeks vs 3 weeks of telephone counseling (plus nicotine replacement) vs screening alone based on 2021 screening eligibility. Lifetime downstream costs (2021 dollars) and effects (life-years gained, quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs]) saved were discounted at 3%. Sensitivity analyses tested the effects of varying quit rates and costs; all analyses assumed nonrelapse after quitting.ResultsThe costs for delivery of the 8-week vs 3-week protocol were $380.23 vs $144.93 per person, and quit rates were 7.14% vs 5.96%, respectively. The least costly strategy was a 3-week counseling approach. An 8-week (vs 3-week) counseling approach increased costs but gained QALYs for an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $4029 per QALY. Screening alone cost more and saved fewer QALYs than either counseling strategy. Conclusions were robust in sensitivity analyses.ConclusionsTelephone-based cessation interventions with nicotine replacement are considered cost-effective in the lung screening setting. Integrating smoking cessation interventions with lung screening programs has the potential to maximize long-term health benefits at reasonable costs.

Towards optimum smoking cessation interventions during pregnancy: a household model to explore cost-effectiveness.

Background and AimsPrevious economic evaluations of smoking cessation interventions for pregnant women are limited to single components, which do not in isolation offer sufficient potential impact to address smoking cessation targets. To inform the development of more appropriate complex interventions, we (1) describe the development of the Economics of Smoking in Pregnancy: Household (ESIP.H) model for estimating the life‐time cost‐effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions aimed at pregnant women and (2) use a hypothetical case study to demonstrate how ESIP.H can be used to identify the characteristics of optimum smoking cessation interventions.MethodsThe hypothetical intervention was based on current evidence relating to component elements, including financial incentives, partner smoking, intensive behaviour change support, cigarettes consumption and duration of support to 12 months post‐partum. ESIP.H was developed to assess the life‐time health and cost impacts of multi‐component interventions compared with standard National Health Service (NHS) care in England. ESIP.H considers cigarette consumption, partner smoking and some health conditions (e.g. obesity) that were not included in previous models. The Markov model's parameters were estimated based on published literature, expert judgement and evidence‐based assumptions. The hypothetical intervention was evaluated from an NHS perspective.ResultsThe hypothetical intervention was associated with an incremental gain in quitters (mother and partner) at 12 months postpartum of 249 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 195–304] per 1000 pregnant smokers. Over the long‐term, it had an incremental negative cost of £193 (CI = –£779 to 344) and it improved health, with a 0.50 (CI = 0.36–0.69) increase in quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs) for mothers, partners and offspring, with a 100% probability of being cost‐effective.ConclusionsThe Economics of Smoking in Pregnancy: Household model for estimating cost‐effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions aimed at pregnant women found that a hypothetical smoking cessation intervention would greatly extend reach, reduce smoking and be cost‐effective.

Cost effectiveness of smoking-cessation interventions following ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack (P16-10.006)

Cost effectiveness of smoking-cessation interventions following ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack (P16-10.006)

Abstract TP72: Cost Effectiveness Of Smoking-Cessation Interventions Following Ischemic Stroke And Transient Ischemic Attack

Introduction: The cost effectiveness of smoking-cessation interventions after ischemic stroke and TIA has not been evaluated. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of smoking-cessation interventions in this population. Methods: We constructed a decision tree model to compare brief counseling alone to 3 interventions: varenicline, any pharmacotherapy with intensive counseling, and monetary incentives. Direct health care costs of interventions and outcomes were modeled. The outcomes were recurrent stroke, myocardial infarction, and death using a 5-year horizon. Estimates and variance for the base case (42% cessation), costs and effectiveness of interventions, and outcome rates were imputed from the stroke literature. Using standard techniques, we calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) and net-monetary benefits (NMB). An intervention was considered cost effective if the ICER was less than the standard willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) or when the NMB was maximized. Sensitivity analyses and a probabilistic Monte Carlo simulation modeled the impact of parameter uncertainty, including for the base case cessation rate and costs and effectiveness of interventions (TreeAge Pro). Results: All three interventions were cost effective based on the ICER: varenicline - $7,422/QALY, pharmacotherapy with counseling - $14,550/QALY, and monetary incentives - $23,280/QALY. In one-way sensitivity analyses, interventions costing up to $1,729 remained cost-effective. In a two-way sensitivity analysis varying the cost and effectiveness of smoking-cessation interventions, all three interventions were cost effective based on NMB (Figure). In 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations, smoking-cessation interventions were cost effective 90% of the time, as compared to brief counseling alone. Conclusion: Smoking-cessation strategies are cost effective in secondary prevention after stroke and TIA.

Modelling long-term cost effectiveness of smoking-cessation interventions in people with mental disorders

Modelling long-term cost effectiveness of smoking-cessation interventions in people with mental disorders

Long-Term Cost-Effectiveness of Smoking Cessation Interventions in People With Mental Disorders: A Dynamic Decision Analytical Model

ObjectivesPeople with mental disorders are more likely to smoke than the general population. The objective of this study is to develop a decision analytical model that estimates long-term cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions in this population. MethodsA series of Markov models were constructed to estimate average lifetime smoking-attributable inpatient cost and expected quality-adjusted life-years. The model parameters were estimated using a variety of data sources. The model incorporated uncertainty through probabilistic sensitivity analysis using Monte Carlo simulations. It also generated tables presenting incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of the proposed interventions with varying incremental costs and incremental quit rates. We used data from 2 published trials to demonstrate the model’s ability to make projections beyond the observational time frame. ResultsThe average smoker’s smoking-attributable inpatient cost was 3 times higher and health utility was 5% lower than ex-smokers. The intervention in the trial with a statistically insignificant difference in quit rate (19% vs 25%; P=.2) showed a 45% to 49% chance of being cost-effective compared with the control at willingness-to-pay thresholds of £20 000 to £30 000/quality-adjusted life-years. The second trial had a significant outcome (quit rate 35.9% vs 15.6%; P<.001), and the corresponding probability of the intervention being cost-effective was 65%. ConclusionsThis model provides a consistent platform for clinical trials to estimate the potential lifetime cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions for people with mental disorders and could help commissioners direct resources to the most cost-effective programs. However, direct comparisons of results between trials must be interpreted with caution owing to their different designs and settings.

Cost-effectiveness of a Smoking Cessation Intervention for Parents in Pediatric Primary Care

Parental smoking adversely affects parents' and children's health. There are effective interventions delivered in pediatric settings to help parents quit smoking. The cost-effectiveness of this type of intervention is not known. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a parental smoking cessation intervention, the Clinical Effort Against Secondhand Smoke Exposure (CEASE) program, delivered in pediatric primary care, compared with usual care from a health care organization's perspective. This economic evaluation used data on intervention costs and parental smoking cessation collected prospectively as part of the CEASE randomized clinical trial. Data were collected at pediatric offices in 5 US states from April 2015 to October 2017. Participants included parents of children attending 10 pediatric primary care practices (5 control, 5 intervention). Data analysis was performed from October 2019 to August 2020. The trial compared CEASE (practice training and support to address family tobacco use) vs usual care. The overall cost and incremental cost per quit of the CEASE intervention were calculated using microcosting methods. CEASE effectiveness was estimated using 2 trial outcomes measures assessed in repeated cross-sections: (1) change in smoking prevalence assessed by parental report for intervention vs usual care practices at 2 weeks after program initiation (baseline) and at 2-year follow-up and (2) changes in the proportion of smokers who achieved cotinine-confirmed smoking cessation in the previous 2 years at baseline vs follow-up. Monte Carlo analyses were used to provide 95% CIs. The study included a total of 3054 participants (1523 at baseline and 1531 at follow-up); 2163 (70.8%) were aged 25 to 44 years old, and 2481 (81.2%) were women. Over 2 years, the total cost of implementing and sustaining CEASE across 5 intervention practices was $115 778. The incremental cost per quit for CEASE compared with usual care was $1132 (95% CI, $653-$3603), according to the change in parent-reported smoking prevalence, and $762 (95% CI, $418-$2883), according to cotinine-confirmed cessation. CEASE was cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $2000 per quit in 88.0% of simulations based on the parent-reported smoking prevalence and 94.6% of simulations based on cotinine-confirmed smoking cessation measures. These findings suggest that the CEASE intervention was associated with an incremental cost per quit that compared favorably with those of other clinical smoking cessation interventions. CEASE is inexpensive to initiate and maintain in the clinical pediatric setting, suggesting that it has the potential for a high impact on population health.

Cost-Effectiveness of Smoking Cessation Interventions in the Lung Cancer Screening Setting: A Simulation Study.

Guidelines recommend offering cessation interventions to smokers eligible for lung cancer screening, but there is little data comparing specific cessation approaches in this setting. We compared the benefits and costs of different smoking cessation interventions to help screening programs select specific cessation approaches. We conducted a societal-perspective cost-effectiveness analysis using a Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network model simulating individuals born in 1960 over their lifetimes. Model inputs were derived from Medicare, national cancer registries, published studies, and micro-costing of cessation interventions.We modeled annual lung cancer screening following 2014 US Preventive Services Task Force guidelines plus cessation interventions offered to current smokers at first screen, including pharmacotherapy only or pharmacotherapy with electronic and/or web-based, telephone, individual, or group counseling.Outcomes included lung cancer cases and deaths, life-years saved, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) saved, costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Compared with screening alone, all cessation interventions decreased cases of and deaths from lung cancer. Compared incrementally, efficient cessation strategies included pharmacotherapy with either web-based cessation ($555 per QALY), telephone counseling ($7562 per QALY), or individual counseling ($35531 per QALY). Cessation interventions continued to have costs per QALY well below accepted willingness to pay thresholds even with the lowest intervention effects and was more cost-effective in cohorts with higher smoking prevalence. All smoking cessation interventions delivered with lung cancer screening are likely to provide benefits at reasonable costs. Because the differences between approaches were small, the choice of intervention should be guided by practical concerns such as staff training and availability.

PRS2 - HEALTH OUTCOMES OF MATERNAL SMOKING DURING PREGNANCY AND POSTPARTUM PERIOD FOR THE MOTHER AND INFANT: AN UMBRELLA REVIEW

Studies estimating the cost of smoking during pregnancy and the cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions aimed at pregnant women have included a limited number of short-term health outcomes. However, smoking during pregnancy can cause long-term health conditions. There are numerous reviews investigating the impact of maternal smoking during pregnancy (SDP) on particular conditions but a systematic review which examines all health conditions caused by maternal SDP does not exist. Hence, a systematic review of previous reviews to assess the overall impacts of SDP and during the postpartum period on the mother and infant is needed. We conducted an umbrella systematic review according to a protocol submitted to PROSPERO (CRD42018086350). CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CRD and HMIC databases were searched to include all peer-reviewed systematic reviews published in English by 31 December 2017. Quality assessment was undertaken using a checklist based on that developed by the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Two reviewers independently conducted the data selection and quality assessment phases. 63 studies which analysed the relationship between maternal SDP and 46 health conditions were included in the analysis. In addition to six maternal conditions, maternal SDP is associated with many short-term or allergy-related conditions among children (low birth weight, asthma, etc.) and long-term health consequences (overweight, obesity, intellectual impairment) which can have detrimental impacts on their lives. When estimating the outcomes of maternal SDP, the long-term health impacts on infants should be considered as well. Additionally, we identified important gaps in the literature regarding the protective impact of smoking, dose-response association, impacts of the exposure duration and postnatal smoking.

PCV70 Cost-Effectiveness of Smoking Cessation Interventions in Smokers With Cardiovascular Disease in the Netherlands

PCV70 Cost-Effectiveness of Smoking Cessation Interventions in Smokers With Cardiovascular Disease in the Netherlands

Overview of the consortium of hospitals advancing research on tobacco (chart)

BackgroundThe Consortium of Hospitals Advancing Research on Tobacco (CHART) is a network of six projects and a research coordinating unit funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the National Cancer Institute, the National Institute on Drug Abuse, and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Office of Behavioral and Social Science Research. The CHART projects will assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions initiated during hospitalization and continued post-discharge.Methods/designAlong with a seventh project funded previously under the NIH Challenge grants, the CHART projects will assess smoking cessation strategies delivered to approximately 10,000 hospitalized smokers across a geographically diverse group of nearly 20 private, public, academic, and community hospitals. The CHART research coordinating unit at Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research provides organizational and data coordination support, facilitating the development of common measures for combining data from multiple CHART projects.DiscussionThe targeted enrollment in CHART, if achieved, will represent the largest, most diverse pooled dataset of hospitalized smokers receiving smoking cessation assistance, and is designed to contribute to the dissemination and implementation of smoking cessation interventions provided by hospital systems.

A Direct Method and ICER Tables for the Estimation of the Cost-Effectiveness of Smoking Cessation Interventions in General Populations: Application to a New Cytisine Trial and Other Examples

The popularity of smoking cost-effectiveness (CE) analysis has grown rapidly. Differences in models and inputs mean results may not be comparable, and researchers may have to take them on trust because the methods are beyond their expertise and not always transparent. We describe a direct method and tables of results for researchers without specialist knowledge. We estimate the health benefit to an individual attributed to an intervention and compute tables of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for interventions with varying incremental intervention effects and costs. Estimates of life years gained come from the longest epidemiological study. After discounting, adjustments are made for future cessation and relapse. The method is described in simple steps, and conservative inputs are used throughout. To look up an ICER, the user needs only to know the cost of the intervention per smoker and the effect as measured by the percentage of ex-smokers attributable to the intervention at either 6- or 12-month follow-up. Reanalysis of authoritative reports indicates that these ICERs are comparable to those from decision-analytic simulation models. Researchers can now obtain immediate estimates of the CE of interventions in general populations. The method is easily programmed in a spreadsheet. ICERs are from the payer perspective and exclude offset and societal costs. Interventions in subpopulations will require inputs specific to those populations. Readers who wish to include an adjustment for quality of life can easily do so. The tables might promote a standard approach, with interventions compared on a consistent and transparent basis.

Utilizing a Computer Predictive Model to Evaluate Cost-effectiveness of Smoking Cessation Interventions and Smoking Related Illnesses

PURPOSE: To develop a computer aided model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of various smoking cessation treatments (nicotine replacement therapy-patch, gum, lozenge, inhaler, or nasal spray; bupropion; varenicline; or “cold turkey”). The model will estimate health and economic outcomes associated with smoking cessation interventions. It will allow clinicians to account for health status changes over time and simulates patient status and possible health outcomes that are more representative of patients encountered in clinical practice.

Development and Validation of a Microsimulation Economic Model to Evaluate the Disease Burden Associated with Smoking and the Cost-Effectiveness of Tobacco Control Interventions in Latin America

ObjectiveTo describe the development and validation of a health economic model (HEM) to address the tobacco disease burden and the cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions (SCI) in seven Latin American countries. MethodsThe preparatory stage included the organization of the research network, analysis of availability of epidemiologic data, and a survey to health decision makers to explore country-specific information needs. The development stage involved the harmonization of a methodology to retrieve local relevant parameters and develop the model structure. Calibration and validation was performed using a selected country dataset (Argentina 2005). Predicted event rates were compared to the published rates used as model inputs. External validation was undertaken against epidemiologic studies that were not used to provide input data. ResultsSixty-eight decision makers were surveyed. A microsimulation HEM was built considering the availability and quality of epidemiologic data and relevant outcomes conceived to suit the identified information needs of decision makers. It considers all tobacco-related diseases (i.e., heart, cerebrovascular and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, pneumonia/influenza, lung cancer, and nine other neoplasms) and can incorporate individual- and population-level interventions. The calibrated model showed all simulated event rates falling within ± 10% of the sources (-9%–+5%). External validation showed a high correlation between published data and model results. ConclusionsThis evidence-based, internally and externally valid HEM for the assessment of the effects of smoking and SCIs incorporates a broad spectrum of tobacco related diseases, SCI, and benefit measures. It could be a useful policy-making tool to estimate tobacco burden and cost-effectiveness of SCI.

Projected Cost-effectiveness of Smoking Cessation Interventions in Patients Hospitalized With Myocardial Infarction

As many as 70% of smokers with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) continue to smoke after hospital discharge despite high rates of inpatient smoking cessation counseling. Supportive contact after discharge improves quit rates but is rarely used. Using data from a meta-analysis of randomized trials of smoking cessation interventions and other published sources, we developed a Monte Carlo model to project health and economic outcomes for a hypothetical US cohort of 327,600 smokers hospitalized with AMI. We compared routine care, consisting of advice to quit smoking, with counseling with supportive follow-up, consisting of routine care and follow-up telephone calls from a nurse after discharge. Primary outcomes were number of smokers, AMIs, and deaths averted; health care and productivity costs; cost per quitter; and cost per quality-adjusted life-year. Implementation of smoking cessation counseling with follow-up contact for the 2010 cohort of hospitalized smokers would create 50,230 new quitters, cost $27.3 million in nurse wages and materials, and prevent 1380 nonfatal AMIs and 7860 deaths. During a 10-year period, it would save $22.1 million in reduced hospitalizations but increase health care costs by $166.4 million, primarily through increased longevity. Productivity costs from premature death would fall by $1.99 billion and nonmedical expenditures would increase by $928 million, for a net positive value to society of $894 million. The program would cost $540 per quitter considering only intervention costs. Cost-effectiveness would be $5050 per quality-adjusted life-year. Results were sensitive to the utility and incidence of nonfatal AMI and the potential effect of pharmacotherapies. Smoking cessation counseling with supportive contact after discharge is potentially cost-effective and may reduce the incidence of smoking and its associated adverse health events and social costs.

Long-term effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions in patients with COPD

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to estimate the long-term (cost-) effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).MethodsA systematic review was performed of randomised...

Crossing Borders: Factors Affecting Differences in Cost-Effectiveness of Smoking Cessation Interventions between European Countries

Many different factors affect the transferability of cost-effectiveness results between countries. The objective is to quantify the impact of nine potential causes of variation in cost-effectiveness of pharmacological smoking cessation therapies (SCTs) between The Netherlands (reference case), Germany, Sweden, UK, Belgium, and France. The life-time benefits of smoking cessation were calculated using the Benefits of Smoking Cessation on Outcomes model, following a cohort of smokers making an unaided quit attempt, or using nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion, or varenicline. We investigated the impact of between-country differences in nine factors-demography, smoking prevalence, mortality, epidemiology and costs of smoking-related diseases, resource use and unit costs of SCTs, utility weights and discount rates-on the incremental net monetary benefit (INMB), using a willingness-to-pay (WTP) of euro20,000 per quality adjusted life year (QALY). The INMB of 1000 quit attempts with NRT versus unaided, varies from euro0.39 million (Germany) to euro1.47 million (France). The differences between the countries were primarily due to differences in discount rates, causing the INMB to change between -65% to +62%, incidence and mortality rates (epidemiology) of smoking-related diseases (-43% to +35%) and utility weights. Impact also depended on the WTP for a QALY and time horizon: at a low WTP or a short time horizon, the resource use and unit costs of SCTs had the highest impact on INMB. Although all INMBs were positive, there were significant differences across countries. These were primarily related to choice of discount rate and epidemiology of diseases.

Cost-effectiveness of the Danish smoking cessation interventions

The cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions is well documented. However, most studies are based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and provide little information on the differences between subgroups. This study assessed the relative cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions offered to various subgroups of smokers, based on real-life data. Regression analyses provided information on the factors determining abstinence and costs and led to the formation of relevant subgroups of smokers. Probabilistic Markov modeling was then used to estimate the relative cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions for the entire database population and for the subgroups compared to a no-intervention case. The ICER for the base case population was estimated at 1,358 euro. This is consistent with results from the existing literature. Group simulations showed lower ICERs for men, hospitals, and light smokers and falling ICERs with increasing age. Despite differences in the cost-effectiveness ratios between subgroups our results do not justify any kind of subgroup differentiation in a smoking prevention policy.