Lifetime costs and lifetime net public expenditures of smoking.

BACKGROUND: Current estimates of lifetime costs of smoking are largely based on model analyses using etiologic fractions for a variety of diseases or Markov chain models. Direct estimation studies based on individual data for health costs by smoking status over a lifetime are non-existent. METHODS: We estimated lifetime costs in a societal perspective of 18-year-old daily-smokers (continuing smoking throughout adult life) and never-smokers in Denmark, as well as lifetime public expenditures in the two groups. Main outcomes were lifetime net public expenditures and lifetime health costs according to OECD definitions and lifetime earned incomes. Estimates of these outcomes were based on registries containing individual-level data. Confounder-adjusted differences between daily-smokers and never-smokers were interpreted as smoking-attributable lifetime public expenditures and costs. RESULTS: The net lifetime public expenditure is, on average, €20 520 higher for male 18-year-old daily-smokers than for never-smokers, but €9771 lower, for female daily-smokers compared with never-smokers. In male 18-year-old daily-smokers, average lifetime health costs are €9921 higher and average lifetime earned incomes are €91 159 lower than for never-smokers. The corresponding figures are €5849 higher and €23 928 lower, respectively, for women. CONCLUSION: 18-year-old male daily-smokers are net public spenders over their lifetime compared with never-smokers, while the opposite applies for women. In Denmark, smoking is associated with higher lifetime health costs for society and losses in earned incomes-both for men and women.

Costs associated with adverse events among acute patients.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to analyse the additional treatment costs of acute patients admitted to a Danish hospital who suffered an adverse event (AE) during in-hospital treatment. METHODS: A matched case-control design was utilised. Using a combination of trigger words and patient record reviews 91 patients exposed to AEs were identified. Controls were identified among patients admitted to the same department during the same 20-month period. The matching was based on age, gender, and main diagnosis. Cost data was extracted from the Danish National Cost Database for four different periods after beginning of the admission. RESULTS: Patients exposed to an AE were associated with higher mean cost of EUR 9505 during their index admission (p = 0.014). For the period of 6 months from the beginning of the admission minus the admission itself they were associated with higher mean cost of EUR 4968 (p = 0.016). For the period from the 7th month until the end of the 12th month there was no statistically significant difference (p = 0.104). For the total period of 12 month, patients exposed to an AE were associated with statistically significant higher mean cost of EUR 13,930 (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: AEs are associated with significant hospital costs. Our findings suggest that a follow-up period of 6 months is necessary when investigating the costs associated with AEs among acute patients. Further research of specific types of AEs and the costs of preventing these types of AEs would improve the understanding of the relationship between adverse events and costs.

Home Care Providers to the Rescue: A Novel First-Responder Programme.

AIM: To describe the implementation of a novel first-responder programme in which home care providers equipped with automated external defibrillators (AEDs) were dispatched in parallel with existing emergency medical services in the event of a suspected out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). METHODS: We evaluated a one-year prospective study that trained home care providers in performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and using an AED in cases of suspected OHCA. Data were collected from cardiac arrest case files, case files from each provider dispatch and a survey among dispatched providers. The study was conducted in a rural district in Denmark. RESULTS: Home care providers were dispatched to 28 of the 60 OHCAs that occurred in the study period. In ten cases the providers arrived before the ambulance service and subsequently performed CPR. AED analysis was executed in three cases and shock was delivered in one case. For 26 of the 28 cases, the cardiac arrest occurred in a private home. Ninety-five per cent of the providers who had been dispatched to a cardiac arrest reported feeling prepared for managing the initial resuscitation, including use of AED. CONCLUSION: Home care providers are suited to act as first-responders in predominantly rural and residential districts. Future follow-up will allow further evaluation of home care provider arrivals and patient survival.

Preventive health screenings and health consultations in primary care increase life expectancy without increasing costs.

AIMS: The intention was to investigate whether preventive health checks and health discussions are cost effective. METHODS: In a randomized trial the authors compared two intervention groups (A and B) and one control group. In 1991 2,000 30- to 49-year-old persons were invited and those who accepted were randomized. Both intervention groups were offered a broad (multiphasic) screening including cardiovascular risk and a personal letter including screening results and advice on healthy living. Individuals in group A could contact their family physician for a normal consultation whereas group B were given fixed appointments for health consultations. The follow-up period was six years. Analysis was carried out on the "intention to treat" principle. Outcome parameters were life years gained, and direct and total health costs (including productivity costs), discounted by 3% annually. Costs were based on register data. Univariate sensitivity analysis was carried out. RESULTS: Both intervention groups have significantly better life expectancy than the control group (no intervention). Group B and (A) significantly gain 0.14 (0.08) life years more than the control group. There were no differences in average direct (3,255 euro (3,703 euro) versus 4,186 euro) and total costs (10,409 euro (9,399 euro) versus 10,667 euro). The effect in group B is, however, better than in group A with no significant differences in costs. The results are insensitive to a range of assumptions regarding costs, effects, and discount rates. CONCLUSIONS: Preventive health screening and consultation in primary care in 30- to 49-year-olds produce significantly better life expectancy without extra direct and total costs over a six-year follow-up period.

The total lifetime health cost savings of smoking cessation to society.

BACKGROUND: Smoking cessation has major immediate and long-term health benefits. However, ex-smokers' total lifetime health costs and continuing smokers' costs remain uncompared, and hence the economic savings of smoking cessation to society have not been determined. METHODS: The economic effects of smoking cessation in a lifetime perspective have been examined by comparing the health costs of continuing smokers and ex-smokers by quantity of daily tobacco consumption, age, gender and disease group, while taking differences in life expectancy and the reductions in relative risks after cessation into account. RESULTS: The total lifetime health cost savings of smoking cessation are highest at the younger ages. Although the economic savings vary with age at quitting, gender and quantity of daily tobacco consumption, all ex-smoking men and women who quit smoking at the age of 35 to 55 years generate sizeable total lifetime cost savings. At older ages, the total lifetime health cost savings of smoking cessation are of little economic consequence to the society. The total, direct and productivity lifetime cost savings of smoking cessation in moderate smokers who quit smoking at the age of 35 years are 24,800 euros, 7600 euros, and 17,200 euros in men, and 34,100 euros, 12,200 euros, and 21,800 euros in women, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Lifetime health cost savings of smoking cessation to society are substantial at younger ages, in terms of both direct and productivity costs.

Perspectives on lifestyle intervention: the views of general practitioners who have taken part in a health promotion study.

AIM: A study was carried out to discover the views of Danish general practitioners on the possibility of intervening in their patients' lifestyles in general and on the obstacles to doing so, based on their experience of participating in a health promotion study. METHOD: A focus group interview was conducted with five general practitioners who had participated in "The Ebeltoft Health Promotion Study" to assess their views on their preventive role. RESULTS: The general practitioners have internalized the view advanced by society and the medical profession that they have an important role to play in preventing lifestyle-related illness. However, they are sceptical about the effectiveness of intervention and have ethical concerns about giving lifestyle advice. They are also somewhat irritated by the fact that patients are chiefly interested in having their health checked, rather than in following up by changing their behaviour. The general practitioners differ in their views as to when, and how actively, they should initiate discussions with individual patients to encourage them to change their lifestyles. CONCLUSIONS: If the medical profession and those responsible for overall health policy wish to make general practitioners change their behaviour towards their patients, it is important that they understand the aims, values, and working conditions of general practitioners that underlie their present attitudes and behaviour.

The total lifetime costs of smoking.

BACKGROUND: Net costs of smoking in a lifetime perspective and, hence, the economic interests in antismoking policies have been questioned. It has been proposed that the health-related costs of smoking are balanced by smaller expenditure due to shorter life expectancy. METHOD: A dynamic (life cycle) method taking differences in life expectancy into account. Main outcome measures were direct and indirect lifetime health costs for ever-smokers and never-smokers, and cost ratios (ever-smokers to never-smokers). The estimations were based on annual disease rates of use of the healthcare services, smoking relative risks, smoking prevalences, and costs. RESULTS: Annual direct and indirect costs of ever-smokers were higher than for never-smokers in all age groups of both genders. The direct and indirect cost ratios were highest at age 45 for women, and at age 35 and 40 for men, respectively. Taking life expectancy differences into account, direct and indirect lifetime health costs for men aged 35, discounted by 5% per year were 66% and 83% higher in ever-smokers than in never-smokers. Corresponding results for women were 74% and 79%, respectively. The results are insensitive to a broad range of relative risk-estimates and discount rates including no discounting. Excess costs of ever-smokers disappear if the inclusion of smoking-related diseases is narrowed to that of previous studies. CONCLUSION: Smoking imposes costs to society even when taking life expectancy into consideration--both in direct and indirect costs.