Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Cost-effectiveness analysis of smoking cessation interventions using cell phones in a low-income population.
Daly, Allan T; Deshmukh, Ashish A; Vidrine, Damon J; Prokhorov, Alexander V; Frank, Summer G; Tahay, Patricia D; Houchen, Maggie E; Cantor, Scott B.
Afiliação
  • Daly AT; Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
  • Deshmukh AA; Department of Health Services Research, The University of Florida Health Science Center, Gainesville, Florida, USA.
  • Vidrine DJ; Oklahoma Tobacco Research Center, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA.
  • Prokhorov AV; Department of Behavioral Science, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
  • Frank SG; Oklahoma Tobacco Research Center, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, USA.
  • Tahay PD; Department of Behavioral Science, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
  • Houchen ME; Department of Behavioral Science, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
  • Cantor SB; Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA.
Tob Control ; 28(1): 88-94, 2019 01.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29886411
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

The prevalence of cigarette smoking is significantly higher among those living at or below the federal poverty level. Cell phone-based interventions among such populations have the potential to reduce smoking rates and be cost-effective.

METHODS:

We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis of three smoking cessation

interventions:

Standard Care (SC) (brief advice to quit, nicotine replacement therapy and self-help written materials), Enhanced Care (EC) (SC plus cell phone-delivered messaging) and Intensive Care (IC) (EC plus cell phone-delivered counselling). Quit rates were obtained from Project ACTION (Adult smoking Cessation Treatment through Innovative Outreach to Neighborhoods). We evaluated shorter-term outcomes of cost per quit and long-term outcomes using cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY).

RESULTS:

For men, EC cost an additional $541 per quit vs SC; however, IC cost an additional $5232 per quit vs EC. For women, EC was weakly dominated by IC-IC cost an additional $1092 per quit vs SC. Similarly, for men, EC had incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $426 per QALY gained vs SC; however, IC resulted in ICER of $4127 per QALY gained vs EC. For women, EC was weakly dominated; the ICER of IC vs SC was $1251 per QALY gained. The ICER was below maximum acceptable willingness-to-pay threshold of $50 000 per QALY under all alternative modelling assumptions.

DISCUSSION:

Cell phone interventions for low socioeconomic groups are a cost-effective use of healthcare resources. Intensive Care was the most cost-effective strategy both for men and women. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT00948129; Results.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Abandono do Hábito de Fumar / Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida / Aconselhamento / Telefone Celular Tipo de estudo: Health_economic_evaluation / Observational_studies / Prevalence_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Abandono do Hábito de Fumar / Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida / Aconselhamento / Telefone Celular Tipo de estudo: Health_economic_evaluation / Observational_studies / Prevalence_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article