Equity implications of tobacco taxation: results from WHO FCTC investment cases.

BACKGROUND: Across time, geographies and country income levels, smoking prevalence is highest among people with lower incomes. Smoking causes further impoverishment of those on the lower end of the income spectrum through expenditure on tobacco and greater risk of ill health. METHODS: This paper summarises the results of investment case equity analyses for 19 countries, presenting the effects of increased taxation on smoking prevalence, health and expenditures. We disaggregate the number of people who smoke, smoking-attributable mortality and cigarette expenditures using smoking prevalence data by income quintile. A uniform 30% increase in price was applied across countries. We estimated the effects of the price increase on smoking prevalence, mortality and cigarette expenditures. RESULTS: In all but one country (Bhutan), a one-time 30% increase in price would reduce smoking prevalence by the largest percent among the poorest 20% of the population. All income groups in all countries would spend more on cigarettes with a 30% increase in price. However, the poorest 20% would pay an average of 12% of the additional money spent. CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirm that health benefits from increases in price through taxation are pro-poor. Even in countries where smoking prevalence is higher among wealthier groups, increasing prices can still be pro-poor due to variable responsiveness to higher prices. The costs associated with higher smoking prevalence among the poor, together with often limited access to healthcare services and displaced spending on basic needs, result in health inequality and perpetuate the cycle of poverty.

Advancing progress on tobacco control in low-income and middle-income countries through economic analysis.

BACKGROUND: More than 80% of the world's 1.3 billion tobacco users live in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), where progress to address tobacco and its harms has been slow. The perception that tobacco control detracts from economic priorities has impeded progress. The Secretariat of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) is leading the FCTC 2030 project, which includes technical assistance to LMICs to analyse the economic costs of tobacco use and the benefits of tobacco control. METHODS: The Secretariat of the WHO FCTC, United Nations Development Programme and WHO supported 21 LMICs between 2017 and 2022 to complete national investment cases to guide country implementation of the WHO FCTC, with analytical support provided by RTI International. These country-level cases combine customised estimates of tobacco's economic impact with qualitative analysis of socio-political factors influencing tobacco control. This paper overviews the approach, observed tobacco control advancements and learnings from 21 countries: Armenia, Cabo Verde, Cambodia, Chad, Colombia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Eswatini, Georgia, Ghana, Jordan, Laos, Madagascar, Myanmar, Nepal, Samoa, Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Tunisia and Zambia. RESULTS: Tobacco control advancements in line with investment case findings and recommendations have been observed in 17 of the 21 countries, and many have improved collaboration and policy coherence between health and economic stakeholders. CONCLUSIONS: Tobacco control must be seen as more than a health concern. Tobacco control leads to economic benefits and contributes to sustainable development. National investment cases can support country ownership and leadership to advance tobacco control.

Interpreting results, impacts and implications from WHO FCTC tobacco control investment cases in 21 low-income and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco control investment cases analyse the health and socioeconomic costs of tobacco use and the benefits that can be achieved from implementing measures outlined in the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC). They are intended to provide policy-makers and other stakeholders with country-level evidence that is relevant, useful and responsive to national priorities and policy context. METHODS: This paper synthesises findings from investment cases conducted in Armenia, Cabo Verde, Cambodia, Chad, Colombia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Eswatini, Georgia, Ghana, Jordan, Laos, Madagascar, Myanmar, Nepal, Samoa, Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Tunisia and Zambia. We examine annual socioeconomic costs associated with tobacco use, focusing on smoking-related healthcare expenditures, the value of lives lost due to tobacco-related mortality and workplace productivity losses due to smoking. We explore potential benefits associated with WHO FCTC tobacco demand-reduction measures. RESULTS: Tobacco use results in average annual socioeconomic losses of US$95 million, US$610 million and US$1.6 billion among the low-income (n=3), lower-middle-income (n=12) and upper-middle-income countries (n=6) included in this analysis, respectively. These losses are equal to 1.1%, 1.8% and 2.9% of average annual national gross domestic product, respectively. Implementation and enforcement of WHO FCTC tobacco demand-reduction measures would lead to reduced tobacco use, fewer tobacco-related deaths and reduced socioeconomic losses. CONCLUSIONS: WHO FCTC tobacco control measures would provide a positive return on investment in every country analysed.

Evolving methodology of national tobacco control investment cases.

BACKGROUND: This article describes an investment case methodology for tobacco control that was applied in 36 countries between 2017 and 2022. METHODS: The WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) investment cases compared two scenarios: a base case that calculated the tobacco-attributable mortality, morbidity and economic costs with status quo tobacco control, and an intervention scenario that described changes in those same outcomes from fully implementing and enforcing a variety of proven, evidence-based tobacco control policies and interventions. Health consequences included the tobacco-attributable share of mortality and morbidity from 38 diseases. The healthcare expenditures and the socioeconomic costs from the prevalence of those conditions were combined to calculate the total losses due to tobacco. The monetised benefits of improvements in health resulting from tobacco control implementation were compared with costs of expanding tobacco control to assess returns on investment in each country. An institutional and context analysis assessed the political and economic dimensions of tobacco control in each context. RESULTS: We applied a rigorous yet flexible methodology in 36 countries over 5 years. The replicable model and framework may be used to inform development of tobacco control cases in countries worldwide. CONCLUSION: Investment cases constitute a tool that development partners and advocates have demanded in even greater numbers. The economic argument for tobacco control provided by this set of country-contextualised analyses can be a strong tool for policy change.

The case for investment in tobacco control: lessons from four countries in the Americas.

Objective: To synthesize learnings from four national tobacco control investment cases conducted in the Americas (Colombia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Suriname) under the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) 2030 project, to describe results and how national health authorities have used the cases, and to discuss implications for the role of investment cases in advancing tobacco control. Methods: We draw on findings from four national investment cases that included 1) a cost-of-illness analysis calculating the health and economic burden of tobacco use, 2) a return-on-investment analysis of implementing key tobacco control demand reduction measures, and 3) a subsidiary analysis of one tobacco control topic of national interest (e.g., equity implications of cigarette taxation). Co-authors reported how cases have been used to advance tobacco control. Results: In Colombia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, and Suriname, tobacco use causes social and economic losses equivalent to between 1.0 to 1.8 percent of GDP. Across these countries, implementing WHO FCTC demand reduction measures would save an average of 11 400 lives per year over the next 15 years. Benefits of the measures would far outweigh the costs of implementation and enforcement. Governments are using the cases to advance tobacco control, including to improve tobacco control laws and their enforcement, strengthen tobacco taxation, prioritize tobacco control planning, coordinate a multisectoral response, and engage political leaders. Conclusions: National investment cases can help to strengthen tobacco control in countries, including by increasing public and political support for implementation of the WHO FCTC and by informing effective planning, legislation, coordination and financing.

The Cost-Effectiveness of Hyperlipidemia Medication in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Review.

Hyperlipidemia is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease - the leading cause of death globally. Increased understanding of the cost-effectiveness of hyperlipidemia treatment in low- and middle-income countries can guide approaches to hyperlipidemia management in resource-limited environments. We conducted a systematic review of the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of hyperlipidemia medication treatment in low- and middle-income countries using studies published between January 2010 and April 2020. We abstracted study details, including study design, treatment setting, intervention type, health metrics, costs standardized to constant 2019 US dollars, and cost-effectiveness measures including average and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Comparisons across studies suggested that treatment via polypill is generally more cost-effective than statin-only therapy, and that primary prevention is more cost-effective than secondary prevention. Treating hyperlipidemia at a threshold of 5.7 mmol/l comes at a higher cost per disability-adjusted life-years averted than at a threshold of 6.2 mmol/l. Most pharmacological treatment strategies for hyperlipidemia were found to be cost-effective in most of the examined low- and middle-income countries.

The case for investment in tobacco control: lessons from four countries in the Americas / El caso de la inversión en el control del tabaco: las enseñanzas de cuatro países de la Región de las Américas / Em defesa do investimento no controle do tabaco: lições de quatro países das Américas

ABSTRACT Objective. To synthesize learnings from four national tobacco control investment cases conducted in the Americas (Colombia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Suriname) under the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) 2030 project, to describe results and how national health authorities have used the cases, and to discuss implications for the role of investment cases in advancing tobacco control. Methods. We draw on findings from four national investment cases that included 1) a cost-of-illness analysis calculating the health and economic burden of tobacco use, 2) a return-on-investment analysis of implementing key tobacco control demand reduction measures, and 3) a subsidiary analysis of one tobacco control topic of national interest (e.g., equity implications of cigarette taxation). Co-authors reported how cases have been used to advance tobacco control. Results. In Colombia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, and Suriname, tobacco use causes social and economic losses equivalent to between 1.0 to 1.8 percent of GDP. Across these countries, implementing WHO FCTC demand reduction measures would save an average of 11 400 lives per year over the next 15 years. Benefits of the measures would far outweigh the costs of implementation and enforcement. Governments are using the cases to advance tobacco control, including to improve tobacco control laws and their enforcement, strengthen tobacco taxation, prioritize tobacco control planning, coordinate a multisectoral response, and engage political leaders. Conclusions. National investment cases can help to strengthen tobacco control in countries, including by increasing public and political support for implementation of the WHO FCTC and by informing effective planning, legislation, coordination and financing.

RESUMEN Objetivo. Resumir las enseñanzas de cuatro casos nacionales de inversión en el control del tabaco llevados a cabo en la Región de las Américas (Colombia, Costa Rica, El Salvador y Surinam) en el marco del proyecto 2030 del Convenio Marco de la Organización Mundial de la Salud para el Control del Tabaco (CMCT), describir los resultados y cómo las autoridades nacionales de salud han empleado los casos, y abordar las implicaciones para la función de los casos de inversión en el avance del control del tabaco. Métodos. Este estudio está basado en los hallazgos de cuatro casos de inversión nacional que incluían 1) un análisis del costo de la enfermedad que estima la carga sanitaria y económica del consumo de tabaco, 2) un análisis del rendimiento de la inversión de la ejecución de medidas clave de reducción de la demanda en el control del tabaco, y 3) un análisis subsidiario de un tema de interés nacional sobre el control del tabaco (por ejemplo, el impacto en la equidad de los impuestos sobre los cigarrillos). Los coautores notificaron cómo se han utilizado los casos para avanzar en el control del tabaco. Resultados. En Colombia, Costa Rica, El Salvador y Surinam, el consumo de tabaco causa pérdidas sociales y económicas equivalentes a entre el 1,0 y el 1,8 por ciento del PIB. En todos estos países, la aplicación de las medidas de reducción de la demanda recogidas en el CMCT de la OMS salvaría una media de 11 400 vidas al año en los próximos 15 años. Los beneficios de estas medidas superarían con creces los costos de ejecución y cumplimiento. Los gobiernos están utilizando los casos para avanzar en el control del tabaco, como para mejorar las leyes de control y su aplicación, reforzar los impuestos sobre el tabaco, priorizar la planificación del control del tabaco, coordinar una respuesta multisectorial e involucrar a los líderes políticos. Conclusiones. Los casos de inversión nacional pueden ayudar a fortalecer el control del tabaco en los países, por ejemplo, al aumentar el apoyo público y político a la aplicación del CMCT de la OMS y al informar sobre una planificación, legislación, coordinación y financiación eficaces.

RESUMO Objetivo. Sintetizar as lições aprendidas com quatro casos de investimento nacional no controle do tabaco nas Américas (Colômbia, Costa Rica, El Salvador e Suriname) no âmbito do projeto Convenção-Quadro para o Controle do Tabaco da Organização Mundial da Saúde (CQCT-OMS) 2030, descrever os resultados e as formas como as autoridades sanitárias nacionais utilizaram os casos e discutir as implicações para o papel dos casos de investimento no avanço do controle do tabaco. Métodos. O presente estudo recorre aos achados de quatro casos de investimento nacional, incluindo: 1) análise de custo da doença, com o cálculo da carga do tabagismo para a saúde e a economia; 2) análise do retorno sobre o investimento na implementação de medidas fundamentais de redução da demanda para controle do tabaco; e 3) análise secundária de um tópico de controle do tabaco de interesse nacional (por exemplo, implicações da tributação de cigarros para a equidade). Os coautores relatam como os casos foram utilizados para promover o controle do tabaco. Resultados. Na Colômbia, na Costa Rica, em El Salvador e no Suriname, o tabagismo provoca perdas sociais e econômicas que equivalem a 1,0 a 1,8% do produto interno bruto. Nesses países, a implementação de medidas de redução da demanda da CQCT-OMS pouparia em média 11.400 vidas por ano nos próximos 15 anos. Os benefícios dessas medidas superariam em muito os custos de implementação e fiscalização. Os governos estão usando esses casos para promover o controle do tabaco, inclusive para melhorar as leis de controle do tabaco e sua fiscalização, reforçar a tributação do tabaco, priorizar o planejamento do controle do tabaco, coordenar uma resposta multissetorial e envolver líderes políticos. Conclusões. Casos de investimento nacional podem ajudar a fortalecer o controle do tabaco nos países, aumentando o apoio político e do público para a implementação da CQCT-OMS e contribuindo para um planejamento, legislação, coordenação e financiamento efetivos.

Building the health-economic case for scaling up the WHO-HEARTS hypertension control package in low- and middle-income countries / Argumentos de la economía de la salud para ampliar las medidas de control de la hipertensión de la iniciativa HEARTS de la OMS en los países de ingresos medianos y bajos / Ampliação do pacote de controle da hipertensão OMS-HEARTS em países de baixa e média renda: argumentos a partir da perspectiva da economia em saúde

ABSTRACT Generally, hypertension control programs are cost-effective, including in low- and middle-income countries, but country governments and civil society are not likely to support hypertension control programs unless value is demonstrated in terms of public health benefits, budget impact, and value-for-investment for the individual country context. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) established a standard, simplified Global HEARTS approach to hypertension control, including preferred antihypertensive medicines and blood pressure measurement devices. The objective of this study is to report on health economic studies of HEARTS hypertension control package cost (especially medication costs), cost-effectiveness, and budget impact and describe mathematical models designed to translate hypertension control program data into the optimal approach to hypertension care service delivery and financing, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Early results suggest that HEARTS hypertension control interventions are either cost-saving or cost-effective, that the HEARTS package is affordable at between US$ 18-44 per person treated per year, and that antihypertensive medicines could be priced low enough to reach a global standard of an average <US$ 5 per patient per year in the public sector. This health economic evidence will make a compelling case for government ownership and financial support for national scale hypertension control programs.

RESUMEN En general, los programas de control de la hipertensión son costo-eficaces, incluso en los países de ingresos bajos y medios. Aun así, es poco probable que los gobiernos nacionales y la sociedad civil apoyen los programas de control de la hipertensión a menos que se demuestre su valor en términos de beneficios para la salud pública, impacto presupuestario y valor de la inversión para el contexto individual del país. La Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) y la Organización Panamericana de la Salud (OPS) implementaron la iniciativa HEARTS, un enfoque mundial estandarizado y simplificado para el control de la hipertensión, que incluye los medicamentos antihipertensivos y los dispositivos de medición de la presión arterial de preferencia. El objetivo de este estudio es informar sobre los estudios en el ámbito de la economía de la salud relativos al costo de las medidas de control de la hipertensión previstas en HEARTS (especialmente, de los medicamentos), la costo-efectividad y el impacto presupuestario, así como describir los modelos matemáticos diseñados para traducir los datos de este programa en un enfoque óptimo para la prestación y el financiamiento de los servicios de atención de la hipertensión, especialmente en países de ingresos medianos y bajos. Los primeros resultados indican que las intervenciones de HEARTS para el control de la hipertensión son de bajo costo o costo-eficaces, que el conjunto de medidas HEARTS es asequible, a un precio que oscila entre US$ 18 y US$ 44 al año por paciente tratado, y que los medicamentos antihipertensivos podrían tener un precio lo suficientemente bajo como para alcanzar un estándar medio mundial de <US$ 5 por paciente al año en el sector público. Estos datos del ámbito de la economía de la salud serán argumentos convincentes para que los gobiernos se involucren en los programas de control de la hipertensión a escala nacional y les brinden apoyo financiero.

RESUMO Geralmente, os programas de controle de hipertensão são custo-efetivos, inclusive em países de baixa e média renda, mas os governos dos países e a sociedade civil provavelmente não apoiarão tais programas a menos que demonstrem valor em termos de benefícios à saúde pública, impacto orçamentário e retorno sobre o investimento no contexto individual do país. A Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS) e a Organização Pan-Americana da Saúde (OPAS) criaram a Global HEARTS, uma abordagem padrão e simplificada ao controle da hipertensão arterial, que inclui medicamentos anti-hipertensivos preferidos e dispositivos para aferição da pressão arterial preferidos. O objetivo deste estudo é relatar os estudos de economia em saúde que analisaram o custo (especialmente custos de medicamentos), custo-benefício e impacto orçamentário do pacote HEARTS para controle da hipertensão e descrever modelos matemáticos elaborados para traduzir os dados do programa de controle de hipertensão em uma abordagem ideal para a prestação e financiamento de serviços de atenção às pessoas com hipertensão, especialmente em países de baixa e média renda. Os primeiros resultados sugerem que as intervenções HEARTS para controle da hipertensão são de baixo custo ou custo-efetivas, que o pacote HEARTS é acessível (custando de US$ 18 a 44 por pessoa tratada por ano) e que o preço dos medicamentos anti-hipertensivos poderia ser baixo o suficiente para atingir uma média global de <US$ 18 por paciente por ano no setor público. Estas evidências do campo da economia em saúde serão um argumento convincente para que os governos se responsabilizem por programas de controle de hipertensão em escala nacional e os dotem de recursos financeiros.

Prevalence and access to care for cardiovascular risk factors in older people in Sierra Leone: a cross-sectional survey.

INTRODUCTION: Prevalence of cardiovascular disease risk factors (CVDRFs) is increasing, especially in low-income countries. In Sierra Leone, there is limited empirical data on the prevalence of CVDRFs, and there are no previous studies on the access to care for these conditions. METHODS: This study in rural and urban Sierra Leone collected demographic, anthropometric measurements and clinical data from randomly sampled individuals over 40 years old using a household survey. We describe the prevalence of the following risk factors: diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidaemia, overweight or obesity, smoking and having at least one of these risk factors. Cascades of care were constructed for diabetes and hypertension using % of the population with the disease who had previously been tested ('screened'), knew of their condition ('diagnosed'), were on treatment ('treated') or were controlled to target ('controlled'). Multivariable regression was used to test associations between prevalence of CVDRFs and progress through the cascade for hypertension with demographic and socioeconomic variables. In those with recognised disease who did not seek care, reasons for not accessing care were recorded. RESULTS: Of 2071 people, 49.6% (95% CI 49.3% to 50.0%) of the population had hypertension, 3.5% (3.4% to 3.6%) had diabetes, 6.7% (6.5% to 7.0%) had dyslipidaemia, 25.6% (25.4% to 25.9%) smoked and 26.5% (26.3% to 26.8%) were overweight/obese; a total of 77.1% (76.6% to 77.5%) had at least one CVDRF. People in urban areas were more likely to have diabetes and be overweight than those living in rural areas. Moreover, being female, more educated or wealthier increased the risk of having all CVDRFs except for smoking. There is a substantial loss of patients at each step of the care cascade for both diabetes and hypertension, with less than 10% of the total population with the conditions being screened, diagnosed, treated and controlled. The most common reasons for not seeking care were lack of knowledge and cost. CONCLUSIONS: In Sierra Leone, CVDRFs are prevalent and access to care is low. Health system strengthening with a focus on increased access to quality care for CVDRFs is urgently needed.

Introducing the PLOS special collection of economic cases for NCD prevention and control: A global perspective.

Noncommunicable diseases (NCDs), such as heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and chronic respiratory disease, are responsible for seven out of every 10 deaths worldwide. While NCDs are associated with aging in high-income countries, this representation is often misleading. Over one-third of the 41 million annual deaths from NCDs occur prematurely, defined as under 70 years of age. Most of those deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where surveillance, treatment, and care of NCDs are often inadequate. In addition to high health and social costs, the economic costs imposed by such high numbers of excess early deaths impede economic development and contribute to global and national inequity. In higher-income countries, NCDs and their risks continue to push health care costs higher. The burden of NCDs is strongly intertwined with economic conditions for good and for harm. Understanding the multiple ways they are connected-through risk factor exposures, access to quality health care, and financial protection among others-will determine which countries are able to improve the healthy longevity of their populations and slow growth in health expenditure particularly in the face of aging populations. The aim of this Special Collection is to provide new evidence to spur those actions.

The investment case as a mechanism for addressing the NCD burden: Evaluating the NCD institutional context in Jamaica, and the return on investment of select interventions.

Noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) are a broad challenge for decision-makers. NCDs account for seven out of every 10 deaths globally, with 42 percent occurring prematurely in individuals under age 70. Despite their heavy toll, NCDs are underfunded, with only around two percent of global funding dedicated to the disease set. Country governments are responsible for funding targeted actions to reduce the NCD burden, but among other priorities, many have yet to invest in the health-system interventions and policy measures that can reduce the burden. This article examines "investment cases" as a potential mechanism for catalyzing attention to-and funding for-NCDs. In Jamaica, using the UN inter-agency OneHealth Tool, we conducted an economic analysis to estimate the return-on-investment from scaling up strategic clinical interventions, and from implementing or intensifying policy measures that target NCD risk factors. In addition, we conducted an institutional and context (ICA) analysis, interviewing stakeholders across sectors to take stock of promising policy pathways (e.g., areas of general consensus, political appetite and opportunity) as well as challenges to implementation. The economic analysis found that scaling up clinical interventions that target CVD, diabetes, and mental health disorders, and policy measures that target tobacco and alcohol use, would save over 6,600 lives between 2017-2032, and avert JMD 81.3 billion (USD 640 million) in direct and indirect economic costs that result from mortality and morbidity linked to NCDs. The ICA uncovered government economic growth targets and social priorities that would be aided by increased attention to NCDs, and it linked these targets and priorities to the economic analysis.

Investing in non-communicable disease risk factor control among adolescents worldwide: a modelling study.

INTRODUCTION: Exposure to non-communicable disease (NCD) risk factors is increasing among adolescents in most countries due to demographic, economic and epidemiological forces. We sought to analyse the potential health impact and costs of implementing NCD risk reduction interventions among adolescents worldwide. METHODS: We identified six interventions targeted at adolescent tobacco smoking, heavy episodic drinking and obesity and supported by effectiveness and cost-effectiveness evidence. Based on a population-level cohort of adolescents in 70 representative countries, we assessed the global mortality consequences of fully implementing these interventions over 2020-2070 using the potential impact fraction approach. We calculated the economic benefits of reduced mortality and estimated the required financial costs, discounting both at 3% annually. We also conducted best-case and worst-case scenario analyses. RESULTS: Full implementation of these interventions worldwide could avert nearly 10% of premature deaths among this cohort, translating to about US$400 billion in cumulative economic benefits. Cumulatively, the required costs would be about US$85 billion, suggesting that every US$1 of public money invested would generate US$5 in increased human capital. Tobacco taxes generally conferred the highest economic returns; however, an in-depth analysis of three countries illustrated the potential for different priorities, such as alcohol control, to emerge. CONCLUSION: From a life course perspective, implementation of a package of interventions to reduce NCD risk among adolescents worldwide would substantially reduce premature mortality at reasonable costs. Our analysis illustrates the importance of integrating NCD prevention policies into the emerging global agenda for adolescent health and well-being.

Costs and cost-effectiveness of HIV/noncommunicable disease integration in Africa: from theory to practice.

: The current article reviews economic aspects of selected HIV/noncommunicable disease (NCD) service delivery integration programs to assess the efficiency of integration in limited capacity settings. We define economies of scope and scale and their relevance to HIV/NCD integration. We summarize the results of a systematic review of cost and cost-effectiveness studies of integrated care, which identified 12 datasets (nine studies) with a wide range of findings driven by differences in research questions, study methods, and health conditions measured. All studies were done in Africa and examined screening interventions only. No studies assessed the cost of integrated, long-term disease management. Few studies estimated the cost-effectiveness of integrated screening programs. The additional cost of integrating NCD screening with HIV care platforms represented a 6-30% increase in the total costs of the programs for noncancer NCDs, with cervical cancer screening costs dependent on screening strategy. We conducted 11 key informant interviews to uncover perceptions of the economics of HIV/NCD integration. None of the informants had hard information about the economic efficiency of integration. Most expected integrated care to be more cost-effective than current practice, though a minority thought that greater specialization could be more cost-effective. In the final section of this article, we summarize research needs and propose a 'minimum economic dataset' for future studies. We conclude that, although integrated HIV/NCD care has many benefits, the economic justification is unproven. Better information on the cost, cost-effectiveness, and fiscal sustainability of integrated programs is needed to justify this approach in limited-resource countries.

Action to address the household economic burden of non-communicable diseases.

The economic burden on households of non-communicable diseases (NCDs), including cardiovascular diseases, cancer, respiratory diseases, and diabetes, poses major challenges to global poverty alleviation efforts. For patients with NCDs, being uninsured is associated with 2-7-fold higher odds of catastrophic levels of out-of-pocket costs; however, the protection offered by health insurance is often incomplete. To enable coverage of the predictable and long-term costs of treatment, national programmes to extend financial protection should be based on schemes that entail compulsory enrolment or be financed through taxation. Priority should be given to eliminating financial barriers to the uptake of and adherence to interventions that are cost-effective and are designed to help the poor. In concert with programmes to strengthen national health systems and governance arrangements, comprehensive financial protection against the growing burden of NCDs is crucial in meeting the UN's Sustainable Development Goals.

Equity impacts of price policies to promote healthy behaviours.

Governments can use fiscal policies to regulate the prices and consumption of potentially unhealthy products. However, policies aimed at reducing consumption by increasing prices, for example by taxation, might impose an unfair financial burden on low-income households. We used data from household expenditure surveys to estimate patterns of expenditure on potentially unhealthy products by socioeconomic status, with a primary focus on low-income and middle-income countries. Price policies affect the consumption and expenditure of a larger number of high-income households than low-income households, and any resulting price increases tend to be financed disproportionately by high-income households. As a share of all household consumption, however, price increases are often a larger financial burden for low-income households than for high-income households, most consistently in the case of tobacco, depending on how much consumption decreases in response to increased prices. Large health benefits often accrue to individual low-income consumers because of their strong response to price changes. The potentially larger financial burden on low-income households created by taxation could be mitigated by a pro-poor use of the generated tax revenues.

Cardiovascular, respiratory, and related disorders: key messages from Disease Control Priorities, 3rd edition.

Cardiovascular, respiratory, and related disorders (CVRDs) are the leading causes of adult death worldwide, and substantial inequalities in care of patients with CVRDs exist between countries of high income and countries of low and middle income. Based on current trends, the UN Sustainable Development Goal to reduce premature mortality due to CVRDs by a third by 2030 will be challenging for many countries of low and middle income. We did systematic literature reviews of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness to identify priority interventions. We summarise the key findings and present a costed essential package of interventions to reduce risk of and manage CVRDs. On a population level, we recommend tobacco taxation, bans on trans fats, and compulsory reduction of salt in manufactured food products. We suggest primary health services be strengthened through the establishment of locally endorsed guidelines and ensured availability of essential medications. The policy interventions and health service delivery package we suggest could serve as the cornerstone for the management of CVRDs, and afford substantial financial risk protection for vulnerable households. We estimate that full implementation of the essential package would cost an additional US$21 per person in the average low-income country and $24 in the average lower-middle-income country. The essential package we describe could be a starting place for low-income and middle-income countries developing universal health coverage packages. Interventions could be rolled out as disease burden demands and budgets allow. Our outlined interventions provide a pathway for countries attempting to convert the UN Sustainable Development Goal commitments into tangible action.

Universal health coverage and intersectoral action for health: key messages from Disease Control Priorities, 3rd edition.

The World Bank is publishing nine volumes of Disease Control Priorities, 3rd edition (DCP3) between 2015 and 2018. Volume 9, Improving Health and Reducing Poverty, summarises the main messages from all the volumes and contains cross-cutting analyses. This Review draws on all nine volumes to convey conclusions. The analysis in DCP3 is built around 21 essential packages that were developed in the nine volumes. Each essential package addresses the concerns of a major professional community (eg, child health or surgery) and contains a mix of intersectoral policies and health-sector interventions. 71 intersectoral prevention policies were identified in total, 29 of which are priorities for early introduction. Interventions within the health sector were grouped onto five platforms (population based, community level, health centre, first-level hospital, and referral hospital). DCP3 defines a model concept of essential universal health coverage (EUHC) with 218 interventions that provides a starting point for country-specific analysis of priorities. Assuming steady-state implementation by 2030, EUHC in lower-middle-income countries would reduce premature deaths by an estimated 4·2 million per year. Estimated total costs prove substantial: about 9·1% of (current) gross national income (GNI) in low-income countries and 5·2% of GNI in lower-middle-income countries. Financing provision of continuing intervention against chronic conditions accounts for about half of estimated incremental costs. For lower-middle-income countries, the mortality reduction from implementing the EUHC can only reach about half the mortality reduction in non-communicable diseases called for by the Sustainable Development Goals. Full achievement will require increased investment or sustained intersectoral action, and actions by finance ministries to tax smoking and polluting emissions and to reduce or eliminate (often large) subsidies on fossil fuels appear of central importance. DCP3 is intended to be a model starting point for analyses at the country level, but country-specific cost structures, epidemiological needs, and national priorities will generally lead to definitions of EUHC that differ from country to country and from the model in this Review. DCP3 is particularly relevant as achievement of EUHC relies increasingly on greater domestic finance, with global developmental assistance in health focusing more on global public goods. In addition to assessing effects on mortality, DCP3 looked at outcomes of EUHC not encompassed by the disability-adjusted life-year metric and related cost-effectiveness analyses. The other objectives included financial protection (potentially better provided upstream by keeping people out of the hospital rather than downstream by paying their hospital bills for them), stillbirths averted, palliative care, contraception, and child physical and intellectual growth. The first 1000 days after conception are highly important for child development, but the next 7000 days are likewise important and often neglected.

Economic Benefit-Cost Analysis of Select Secondary Prevention Interventions in LMIC.

We present a quantitative economic benefit-cost analysis of 2 secondary prevention targets that are part of the World Health Organization's Global Monitoring Framework for noncommunicable diseases (NCD). These targets are expected to contribute to the achievement of the overall NCD target proposed for the Post-2015 Sustainable Development Goal Framework. We estimate that interventions would need to avert roughly 6 million to 7 million NCD deaths worldwide in 2030 to meet the target. We calculate that the combination of tobacco taxation that achieves 50% reduction in use and 70% coverage of high-risk populations with a multidrug regimen can provide one-half of that mortality reduction in 2030, at a benefit-cost ratio of 7:1, or U.S. $7 in benefits for each U.S. $1 in cost.

Health gains and financial risk protection afforded by public financing of selected interventions in Ethiopia: an extended cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: The way in which a government chooses to finance a health intervention can affect the uptake of health interventions and consequently the extent of health gains. In addition to health gains, some policies such as public finance can insure against catastrophic health expenditures. We aimed to evaluate the health and financial risk protection benefits of selected interventions that could be publicly financed by the government of Ethiopia. METHODS: We used extended cost-effectiveness analysis to assess the health gains (deaths averted) and financial risk protection afforded (cases of poverty averted) by a bundle of nine (among many other) interventions that the Government of Ethiopia aims to make universally available. These nine interventions were measles vaccination, rotavirus vaccination, pneumococcal conjugate vaccination, diarrhoea treatment, malaria treatment, pneumonia treatment, caesarean section surgery, hypertension treatment, and tuberculosis treatment. FINDINGS: Our analysis shows that, per dollar spent by the Ethiopian Government, the interventions that avert the most deaths are measles vaccination (367 deaths averted per $100,000 spent), pneumococcal conjugate vaccination (170 deaths averted per $100,000 spent), and caesarean section surgery (141 deaths averted per $100,000 spent). The interventions that avert the most cases of poverty are caesarean section surgery (98 cases averted per $100,000 spent), tuberculosis treatment (96 cases averted per $100,000 spent), and hypertension treatment (84 cases averted per $100,000 spent). INTERPRETATION: Our approach incorporates financial risk protection into the economic evaluation of health interventions and therefore provides information about the efficiency of attainment of both major objectives of a health system: improved health and financial risk protection. One intervention might rank higher on one or both metrics than another, which shows how intervention choice-the selection of a pathway to universal health coverage-might involve weighing up of sometimes competing objectives. This understanding can help policy makers to select interventions to target specific policy goals (ie, improved health or financial risk protection). It is especially relevant for the design and sequencing of universal health coverage to meet the needs of poor populations.