The Impoverishing Effect of Tobacco Use in Indonesia.

BACKGROUND: Smoking households in Indonesia diverted a significant share of their budget to tobacco. Tobacco expenditure is deemed unproductive, as it crowds out resources from essential commodities and increases health care expenditure driven by tobacco-induced diseases. Therefore, despite having adequate resources, some smoking families in Indonesia may spend less on basic needs, which inadvertently puts their standard of living below the poverty line. METHODS: Employing data from 2021 (March) Indonesia's Socioeconomic Survey (SUSENAS), this research aims to quantify the impoverishing effect of tobacco consumption in Indonesia, considering spending on tobacco and tobacco-attributable health care costs as unproductive expenditure. The de facto headcount poverty rate and poverty gap index are calculated by removing tobacco expenditures and tobacco-attributable health care expenditures from the household's total spending. RESULTS: Accounting for unproductive spending related to tobacco use, Indonesia's headcount poverty ratio in March 2021 would rise by 3.22 percentage points, equivalent to an additional 8.75 million people living below the poverty line. In addition, the poverty gap index would increase by 0.77 percentage points. The impoverishment effect of tobacco is larger among rural populations than their urban counterparts. Moreover, the impoverishment is mainly driven by direct tobacco spending rather than tobacco-attributable health care expenditure. CONCLUSIONS: Significant portions of Indonesia's population are exposed to secondary poverty due to tobacco use. A high level of cigarette spending among smoking households is the major source of the impoverishing effect of tobacco use. IMPLICATIONS: The study provides quantitative evidence of the true cost of smoking in Indonesia, where the de facto number of the poor population after accounting for tobacco-related spending is higher than what is published in the official statistics. The findings of this study support tobacco control policies in Indonesia, particularly to effectively reduce tobacco use and mitigate the impoverishing impact of tobacco use on low-income households.

Crowding-out effect of tobacco consumption in Indonesia.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco consumption is pervasive in Indonesia, with 6 out of 10 households in the country consuming tobacco. Smoking households, on average, divert a significant share (10.7%) of their monthly budget on tobacco products, which is higher than spending on staples, meat or vegetables. Nevertheless, evidence of the causal link between tobacco expenditure and spending on other commodities in Indonesia is limited. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to estimate the crowding-out effects of tobacco spending on the expenditure of other goods and services in Indonesia. METHOD: This research estimates the conditional Engel curve with three-stage least square regression, where the instrumental variable technique is applied to address the simultaneity of tobacco and total non-tobacco spending. The study employs a large-scale household budget survey from the Indonesian socioeconomic survey (Susenas) from 2017 to 2019, comprising over 900 000 households. FINDING: Tobacco spending crowds out the share of a household's budget allocated for food, such as spending on staples, meat, dairy, vegetables and fruits. Moreover, tobacco spending also reduces the share of expenditure spent on non-food commodities, such as clothing, housing, utilities, durable and non-durable goods, education, healthcare and entertainment, although its effect is not as large as the crowding out on food. The analysis shows that the crowding-out effects of tobacco are observed across low-income, middle-income and high-income households. In addition, the simulation suggests that reducing tobacco expenditure will increase household spending on essential needs.

The cost of post-abortion care (PAC): a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Despite the increasing trend of Postabortion Care (PAC) needs and provision, the evidence related to its cost is lacking. This study aims to review the costs of Postabortion Care (PAC) per patient at a national level. METHODS: A systematic review of literature related to PAC cost published in 1994 - October 2020 was performed. Electronic databases such as PubMed, Medline, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were used to search the literature. Following the title and abstract screening, reporting quality was appraised using the Consolidates Health Economic Evaluation (CHEERS) checklist. PAC costs were extrapolated into US dollars ($US) and international dollars ($I), both in 2019. RESULTS: Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria. All studies reported direct medical cost per patient in accessing PAC, but only three of them included indirect medical cost. All studies reported either average or range of cost. In terms of range, the highest direct cost of PAC with MVA (Medical Vacuum Aspiration) services can be found in Colombia, between $US50.58-212.47, while the lowest is in Malawi ($US15.2-139.19). The highest direct cost of PAC with D&C (Dilatation and Curettage), services is in El Salvador ($US65.22-240.75), while the lowest is in Bangladesh ($US15.71-103.85). Among two studies providing average indirect cost data, Uganda with $US105.04 has the highest average indirect medical cost, while Rwanda with $US51.44 has the lowest. CONCLUSIONS: Our review shows variability in the cost of PAC across countries. This study depicts a clearer picture of how costly it is for women to access PAC services, although it is still seemingly underestimated. When a study compared the use of UE (Uterine Evacuation) method between MVA and D&C, it is confirmed that MVA treatments tend to have lower costs and potentially reduce a significant cost. Therefore, by looking at both clinical and economic perspectives, improving and strengthening the quality and accessibility of PAC with MVA is a priority.