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.

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 reported impact of non-communicable disease investment cases in 13 countries.

Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are a leading health and development challenge worldwide. Since 2015, WHO and the United Nations Development Programme have provided support to governments to develop national NCD investment cases to describe the socioeconomic dimensions of NCDs. To assess the impact of the investment cases, semistructured interviews and a structured process for gathering written feedback were conducted between July and October 2022 with key informants in 13 countries who had developed a national NCD investment case between 2015 and 2020. Investment cases describe: (1) the social and economic costs of NCDs, including their distribution and projections over time; (2) priority areas for scaled up action; (3) the cost and returns from investing in WHO-recommended measures to prevent and manage NCDs; and (4) the political dimensions of NCD responses. While no country had implemented all the recommendations set out in their investment case reports, actions and policy changes attributable to the investment cases were identified, across (1) governance; (2) financing; and (3) health service access and delivery. The pathways of these changes included: (1) stronger collaboration across government ministries and partners; (2) advocacy for NCD prevention and control; (3) grounding efforts in nationally owned data and evidence; (4) developing mutually embraced 'language' across health and finance; and (5) elevating the priority accorded to NCDs, by framing action as an investment rather than a cost. The assessment also identified barriers to progress on the investment case implementation, including the influence of some private sector entities on sectors other than health, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, and changes in senior political and technical government officials. The results suggest that national NCD investment cases can significantly contribute to catalysing the prevention and control of NCDs through strengthening governance, financing, and health service access and delivery.

Peri-Implant Fracture Following Prior Fixation of Femoral Neck Fracture Using the Femoral Neck System: A Case Report.

Introduction: Peri-implant fractures (PIF) reported after cannulated screw and dynamic hip screw fixation historically occur distal to the implant within the subtrochanteric region secondary to the development of a stress riser. Newer implant designs for femoral neck fractures have attempted to combine the benefits of minimally invasive techniques without forgoing rigid angular stability but bring new potential complications. Case Report: We present a case of an intertrochanteric PIF in the setting of a non-displaced femoral neck fracture treated with the DePuy Synthes Femoral Neck System (FNS). Conclusion: We present this case of a unique PIF pattern with the hope of identifying a potential complication associated with the novel FNS. Furthermore, we present a successful treatment option avoiding the need for conversion to hemiarthroplasty.

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

[ABSTRACT]. Objective. To synthesize learnings from four national tobacco control investment cases conducted in the Ameri- cas (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 implement- ing 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 mea- sures 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 plan- ning, 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 implica- ciones 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 soci- ais 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.

Competing Frames in Global Health Governance: An Analysis of Stakeholder Influence on the Political Declaration on Non-communicable Diseases.

BACKGROUND: Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are increasingly recognized as a significant threat to health and development globally, and United Nations (UN) Member States adopted the Political Declaration of the Third High-level Meeting (HLM) on the prevention and control of NCDs in 2018. The negotiation process for the Declaration included consultations with Member States, intergovernmental organizations (IGOs), and non-state actors such as non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the private sector. With NCD responses facing charges of inadequacy, it is important to scrutinize the governance process behind relevant high-level global decisions and commitments. METHODS: Through a review of 159 documents submitted by stakeholders during the negotiation process, we outline a typology of policy positions advocated by various stakeholders in the development of the Declaration. We document changes in text from the draft to the final version of the Declaration to analyse the extent to which various positions and their proponents were influential. RESULTS: NGOs and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) generally pursued 'stricter' governance of NCD risk factors including stronger regulation of unhealthy products and improved management of conflicts of interest that arise when health-harming industries are involved in health policy-making. The private sector and high-income countries generally opposed greater restrictions on commercial factors. The pattern of changes between the draft and final Declaration indicate that advocated positions tended to be included in the Declaration if there was no clear opponent, whereas opposed positions were either not included or included with ambiguous language. CONCLUSION: Many cost-effective policy options to address NCDs, such as taxation of health-harming products, were opposed by high-income countries and the private sector and not well-represented in the Declaration. To ensure robust political commitments and action on NCDs, multi-stakeholder governance for NCDs must consider imbalances in power and influence amongst constituents as well as biases and conflicts in positioning.

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.

Correction: 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.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223412.].

Financing intersectoral action for health: a systematic review of co-financing models.

BACKGROUND: Addressing the social and other non-biological determinants of health largely depends on policies and programmes implemented outside the health sector. While there is growing evidence on the effectiveness of interventions that tackle these upstream determinants, the health sector does not typically prioritise them. From a health perspective, they may not be cost-effective because their non-health outcomes tend to be ignored. Non-health sectors may, in turn, undervalue interventions with important co-benefits for population health, given their focus on their own sectoral objectives. The societal value of win-win interventions with impacts on multiple development goals may, therefore, be under-valued and under-resourced, as a result of siloed resource allocation mechanisms. Pooling budgets across sectors could ensure the total multi-sectoral value of these interventions is captured, and sectors' shared goals are achieved more efficiently. Under such a co-financing approach, the cost of interventions with multi-sectoral outcomes would be shared by benefiting sectors, stimulating mutually beneficial cross-sectoral investments. Leveraging funding in other sectors could off-set flat-lining global development assistance for health and optimise public spending. Although there have been experiments with such cross-sectoral co-financing in several settings, there has been limited analysis to examine these models, their performance and their institutional feasibility. AIM: This study aimed to identify and characterise cross-sectoral co-financing models, their operational modalities, effectiveness, and institutional enablers and barriers. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature, following PRISMA guidelines. Studies were included if data was provided on interventions funded across two or more sectors, or multiple budgets. Extracted data were categorised and qualitatively coded. RESULTS: Of 2751 publications screened, 81 cases of co-financing were identified. Most were from high-income countries (93%), but six innovative models were found in Uganda, Brazil, El Salvador, Mozambique, Zambia, and Kenya that also included non-public and international payers. The highest number of cases involved the health (93%), social care (64%) and education (22%) sectors. Co-financing models were most often implemented with the intention of integrating services across sectors for defined target populations, although models were also found aimed at health promotion activities outside the health sector and cross-sectoral financial rewards. Interventions were either implemented and governed by a single sector or delivered in an integrated manner with cross-sectoral accountability. Resource constraints and political relevance emerged as key enablers of co-financing, while lack of clarity around the roles of different sectoral players and the objectives of the pooling were found to be barriers to success. Although rigorous impact or economic evaluations were scarce, positive process measures were frequently reported with some evidence suggesting co-financing contributed to improved outcomes. CONCLUSION: Co-financing remains in an exploratory phase, with diverse models having been implemented across sectors and settings. By incentivising intersectoral action on structural inequities and barriers to health interventions, such a novel financing mechanism could contribute to more effective engagement of non-health sectors; to efficiency gains in the financing of universal health coverage; and to simultaneously achieving health and other well-being related sustainable development goals.

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.

Профилактика неинфекционных заболеваний и борьба с ними в Казахстане: аргументы в пользу инвестирования

Неинфекционные заболевания (НИЗ), такие как рак, сердечно-сосудистые заболевания, диабет и хронические респираторные заболевания, а также их факторы риска, являются растущей проблемой в области развития и общественного здравоохранения в Казахстане. В настоящем докладе предлагаются фактические данные, полученные в результате трех проведенных анализов, подтверждающие, что НИЗ способствуют сокращению объемов производства; в нем также рассматриваются возможные варианты мер, направленных на решение этой проблемы, с обзором относительного возврата инвестиций для каждой меры. Анализ экономического ущерба показал, что экономические потери, обусловленные НИЗ (прямые затраты и потери для экономики), составляют 2,3 трлн. тенге, что эквивалентно 4,5% валового внутреннего продукта страны за 2017 год. В рамках проведения расчета затрат на осуществление вмешательств были предварительно оценены объемы финансирования, необходимые для реализации комплекса профилактических мер и клинических вмешательств. В ходе проведения анализа экономической эффективности затраты на осуществление вмешательств были сопоставлены с прогнозируемым улучшением показателей здоровья, а также определены пакеты мер, дающие максимальный возврат инвестиций. Например, коэффициент соотношения затрат и выгод для пакета мер, направленных на сокращение потребления соли, составляет 118,4 за 15-летний период. Это прибыль в размере более 118 тенге на каждый инвестированный тенге.

Prevention and control of noncommunicable diseases in Kazakhstan: the case for investment

Noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) such as cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes and chronic respiratory diseases and their risk factors are an increasing public health and development challenge in Kazakhstan. This report provides evidence through three analyses that NCDs reduce economic output and discusses potential options in response, outlining details of their relative returns on investment. An economic burden analysis shows that economic losses from NCDs (direct and indirect costs) comprise 2.3 trillion tenge, equivalent to 4.5% of gross domestic product in 2017. An intervention costing analysis provides an estimate of the funding required to implement a set of policy interventions for prevention and clinical interventions. A cost–benefit analysis compares these implementation costs with the estimated health gains and identifies which policy packages would give the greatest returns on investment. For example, the salt policy package achieved a benefit-to-cost ratio of 118.4 over 15 years, a return of more than 118 tenge for every 1 tenge invested.

Reasons for Guideline Nonadherence at Heart Failure Discharge.

Background Cardiology has advanced guideline development and quality measurement. Recognizing the substantial benefits of guideline-directed medical therapy, this study aims to measure and explain apparent deviations in heart failure ( HF ) guideline adherence by clinicians at hospital discharge and describe any impact on readmission rates. Methods and Results The extent of decongestion and prescription of neurohormonal therapy were recorded prospectively for 226 HF discharges, including 132 (58%) from an academic hospital and 94 (42%) from a community hospital. Among all discharges, 25% were discharged with residual congestion (30% academic versus 18% community, P=0.070). Among discharges of patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction, 37% (45% academic versus 18% community, P<0.001) were discharged without ß-blocker therapy or with lower doses than at admission. Moreover, 46% of patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction (48% academic versus 39% community, P=0.390) were discharged without an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin II receptor blocker or with lower doses than at admission. Renal dysfunction was the most common reason for discharge with congestion, and hypotension the most common reason for discharge with no or decreased neurohormonal therapy. There was a trend toward higher 90-day readmission rates after discharge with residual congestion. Conclusions Clinicians frequently deviate from guidelines in both academic and community hospitals; however, this deviation may not always indicate poor quality. Application of guidelines recommended for stable populations is increasingly limited for hospitalized patients by hypotension, renal dysfunction, and inotrope use. Patients with renal dysfunction, hypotension, and recent inotrope use merit further study to determine best practices and possibly to adjust quality metrics for HF severity.

Remote Monitoring in Heart Failure: the Current State.

OPINION STATEMENT: The treatment of congestive heart failure is an expensive undertaking with much of this cost occurring as a result of hospitalization. It is not surprising that many remote monitoring strategies have been developed to help patients maintain clinical stability by avoiding congestion. Most of these have failed. It seems very unlikely that these failures were the result of any one underlying false assumption but rather from the fact that heart failure is a progressive, deadly disease and that human behavior is hard to modify. One lesson that does stand out from the myriad of methods to detect congestion is that surrogates of congestion, such as weight and impedance, are not reliable or actionable enough to influence outcomes. Too many factors influence these surrogates to successfully and confidently use them to affect HF hospitalization. Surrogates are often attractive because they can be inexpensively measured and followed. They are, however, indirect estimations of congestion, and due to the lack specificity, the time and expense expended affecting the surrogate do not provide enough benefit to warrant its use. We know that high filling pressures cause transudation of fluid into tissues and that pulmonary edema and peripheral edema drive patients to seek medical assistance. Direct measurement of these filling pressures appears to be the sole remote monitoring modality that shows a benefit in altering the course of the disease in these patients. Congestive heart failure is such a serious problem and the consequences of hospitalization so onerous in terms of patient well-being and costs to society that actual hemodynamic monitoring, despite its costs, is beneficial in carefully selected high-risk patients. Those patients who benefit are ones with a prior hospitalization and ongoing New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III symptoms. Patients with NYHA class I and II symptoms do not require hemodynamic monitoring because they largely have normal hemodynamics. Those with NYHA class IV symptoms do not benefit because their hemodynamics are so deranged that they cannot be substantially altered except by mechanical circulatory support or heart transplantation. Finally, hemodynamic monitoring offers substantial hope to those patients with normal ejection fraction (EF) heart failure, a large group for whom medical therapy has largely been a failure. These patients have not benefited from the neurohormonal revolution that improved the lives of their brothers and sisters with reduced ejection fractions. Hemodynamic stabilization improves the condition of both but more so of the normal EF cohort. This is an important observation that will help us design future trials for the 50% of heart failure patients with normal systolic function.