Effectiveness and Policy Determinants of Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxes.

Sugar consumption is on the rise globally with detrimental (oral) health effects. There is ample evidence that sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) taxes can efficiently reduce sugar consumption. However, evidence alone is seldom enough to implement a policy. In this article, we present a narrative synthesis of evidence, based on real-world SSB tax evaluations, and we combine this with lessons from policy development case studies. This article is structured according to the Health Policy Analysis Triangle, which identifies a policy's content and process and important contextual factors. SSB tax policy content needs to be coupled to existing problems and public sentiment, which depend on more aspects than aspects related to (oral) health alone. Whether or not to include artificially sweetened beverages, therefore, is not solely a matter of showing the evidence of their oral health impact but also dependent on the stated aim of a tax and public sentiment toward tax policies in general. SSB taxes also need to be in line with existing tax and decision-making rules. Earmarking revenue for specific (health promotion) purposes may therefore be less straightforward as it might appear. The policy process of creating context-sensitive SSB tax policy content is not easy either. Advocacy coalitions need to be formed early in the process, and stamina, expertise, and flexibility are required to get a SSB tax adopted in a specific community. This requires a meticulously considered SSB tax structure implementation process. Oral health professionals who want to lead the way in advocating for SSB taxes should realize that evidence-based arguments on potential effectiveness alone will not be enough to realize change. The oral health community can learn important lessons from other "doctor-activists" such as pulmonologists, who have successfully advocated for higher tobacco taxes by being visible in the public debate with clear messaging and robust policy proposals.

Front-of-Package Food Labeling to Reduce Caries: Economic Evaluation.

Front-of-package food labeling (FoPFL) is increasingly advocated as an effective intervention to facilitate behavior changes toward healthier food purchasing and consumption, particularly in relation to products with added sugar. The present study assessed the potential caries-related impacts of FoPFL, using Germany as an example. The outcomes of interest were caries lesions prevented, dental treatment costs avoided, productivity loss reductions, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted. The baseline consumption of added sugar was derived from the German National Nutrition Survey. The reduction in sugar intake due to FoPFL was modeled according to estimates from a recent meta-analysis. Microsimulations were performed for 500,000 individuals and over a time horizon of 10 y. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to check the robustness of results. For the period from 2017 to 2027, FoPFL was identified to prevent 2,370,715 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2,062,730-2,678,700) caries lesions and avert 677.62 (95% CI, 589.59-765.65) DALYs. Treatment cost savings amounted to €175.67 million (95% CI, €152.85-€198.49), and productivity losses reduced by €27.33 million (95% CI, €23.78-€30.88). Sensitivity analyses showed that the magnitude of the effects is highly dependent on consumers' response to FoPFL. Our findings suggest that FoPFL has the potential to substantially reduce caries increment, caries-related morbidity, and economic burden. In addition, our study allows for the inclusion of oral health estimates in overall health estimates for sugar-related food labeling. Before prioritizing a strategy to tackle sugar consumption, decision makers should carefully consider all relevant context-specific factors and implementation costs.

The caries-related cost and effects of a tax on sugar-sweetened beverages.

OBJECTIVES: While taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) have frequently been proposed to reduce non-communicable diseases like obesity and type 2 diabetes, relatively little is known about the caries-related impacts of SSB taxation. We assessed the effect of a 20% ad valorem tax on SSBs on dental caries and related treatment costs, specifically taking into account that consumers may switch from SSBs to other (non-taxed) sugar-containing drinks. STUDY DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analysis. METHODS: A tooth-level Markov model was developed to evaluate the cost and effects of SSB taxation. Tax-related changes in sugar consumption were calculated using available evidence on SSBs price and cross-price elasticities, thereby taking changes in drinks consumption behaviors into account. The model was used to establish lifetime disease-free tooth years, caries lesions prevented, caries-related treatment costs avoided, tax revenues, and administrative costs (reference case: the Netherlands). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to address uncertainties. RESULTS: A 20% SSB taxation would result in an average of 2.13 (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 2.12-2.13) caries-free tooth years per person and, on population level, prevention of 1,030,163 (95% UI 1,027,903-1,032,423) caries lesions. The intervention was found to save an aggregate total of € 159.01 (95% UI 158.67-159.35) million in terms of dental care expenditures. The estimated lifetime tax revenues (€3.49billion) were larger than the administrative costs for taxation (€37.3 million). CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that SSB taxation may substantially improve oral health and reduce the caries-related economic burden. Benefits would be the greatest for younger age groups.

Global-, Regional-, and Country-Level Economic Impacts of Dental Diseases in 2015.

Up-to-date information about the economic impact of dental diseases is essential for health care decision makers when seeking to make rational use of available resources. The purpose of this study was to provide up-to-date estimates for dental expenditures (direct costs) and productivity losses (indirect costs) due to dental diseases on the global, regional, and country level. Direct costs of dental diseases were estimated using a previously established systematic approach; indirect costs were estimated using an approach developed by the World Health Organization Commission on Macroeconomics and Health and factoring in 2015 values for gross domestic product and disability-adjusted life years from the Global Burden of Disease Study. The estimated direct costs of dental diseases amounted to $356.80 billion and indirect costs were estimated at $187.61 billion, totaling worldwide costs due to dental diseases of $544.41 billion in 2015. After adjustment for purchasing power parity, the highest levels of per capita dental expenditures were found for High-Income North America, Australasia, Western Europe, High-Income Asia Pacific, and East Asia; the highest levels of per capita productivity losses were found for Western Europe, Australasia, High-Income North America, High-Income Asia Pacific, and Central Europe. Severe tooth loss was found to imply 67% of global productivity losses due to dental diseases, followed by severe periodontitis (21%) and untreated caries (12%). From an economic perspective, improvements in population oral health may be highly beneficial and could contribute to further increases in people's well-being given available resources.