TY - JOUR
T1 - Cost-effectiveness of an Intensive Smoking Cessation Intervention for COPD Outpatients
AU - Christenhusz, Lieke C.A.
AU - Prenger, Hendrikje Cornelia
AU - Pieterse, Marcel E.
AU - Seydel, E.R.
AU - van der Palen, Jacobus Adrianus Maria
PY - 2012
Y1 - 2012
N2 - Introduction: To determine the cost-effectiveness of a high-intensity smoking cessation program (SmokeStop Therapy; SST) versus a medium-intensity treatment (Minimal Intervention Strategy for Lung patients [LMIS]) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease outpatients.
Methods: The cost-effectiveness analysis was based on a randomized controlled trial investigating the effectiveness of the SST compared with the LMIS with 12-month follow-up. The primary outcome measure was the cotinine-validated continuous abstinence rate based on intention to treat. A health care perspective was adopted, with outcomes assessed in terms of (incremental) additional quitters gained, exacerbations prevented, and hospital days prevented. Health care resource use, associated with smoking cessation, was collected at baseline and 12 months after the start of the interventions. Monte Carlo simulations were performed to evaluate the robustness of the results.
Results: The average patient receiving SST generated €581 in health care costs, including the costs of the smoking cessation program, versus €595 in the LMIS. The SST is also associated with a lower average number of exacerbations (0.38 vs. 0.60) and hospital days (0.39 vs. 1) per patient and a higher number of quitters (20 vs. 9) at lower total costs. This leads to a dominance of the SST compared with the LMIS.
Conclusions: The high-intensive SST is more cost-effective than the medium-intensive LMIS after 1 year. This is associated with cost savings per additional quitter, prevented exacerbations, and hospital days at lower or equal costs
AB - Introduction: To determine the cost-effectiveness of a high-intensity smoking cessation program (SmokeStop Therapy; SST) versus a medium-intensity treatment (Minimal Intervention Strategy for Lung patients [LMIS]) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease outpatients.
Methods: The cost-effectiveness analysis was based on a randomized controlled trial investigating the effectiveness of the SST compared with the LMIS with 12-month follow-up. The primary outcome measure was the cotinine-validated continuous abstinence rate based on intention to treat. A health care perspective was adopted, with outcomes assessed in terms of (incremental) additional quitters gained, exacerbations prevented, and hospital days prevented. Health care resource use, associated with smoking cessation, was collected at baseline and 12 months after the start of the interventions. Monte Carlo simulations were performed to evaluate the robustness of the results.
Results: The average patient receiving SST generated €581 in health care costs, including the costs of the smoking cessation program, versus €595 in the LMIS. The SST is also associated with a lower average number of exacerbations (0.38 vs. 0.60) and hospital days (0.39 vs. 1) per patient and a higher number of quitters (20 vs. 9) at lower total costs. This leads to a dominance of the SST compared with the LMIS.
Conclusions: The high-intensive SST is more cost-effective than the medium-intensive LMIS after 1 year. This is associated with cost savings per additional quitter, prevented exacerbations, and hospital days at lower or equal costs
KW - IR-82595
KW - METIS-290816
U2 - 10.1093/ntr/ntr263
DO - 10.1093/ntr/ntr263
M3 - Article
SN - 1462-2203
VL - 14
SP - 657
EP - 663
JO - Nicotine & tobacco research
JF - Nicotine & tobacco research
IS - 6
ER -