A systematic review of the modelling and economic evaluation studies assessing regulatory options for e-cigarette use

被引:0
作者
Collins, Louisa G. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Lindsay, Daniel [1 ]
Lal, Anita [4 ]
Doan, Tan [5 ]
Schuz, Joachim [6 ]
Jongenelis, Michelle [7 ]
Scollo, Michelle [8 ]
机构
[1] QIMR Berghofer Med Res Inst, Populat Hlth Program, 300 Herston Rd, Brisbane, Qld 2000, Australia
[2] Queensland Univ Technol QUT, Sch Nursing, Brisbane, Qld, Australia
[3] Univ Queensland, Sch Publ Hlth, Brisbane, Qld, Australia
[4] Deakin Univ, Deakin Hlth Econ, Burwood, Vic, Australia
[5] Queensland Ambulance Serv, Dept Hlth, Brisbane, Australia
[6] WHO, Int Agcy Res Canc, Lyon, France
[7] Univ Melbourne, Melbourne Sch Psychol Sci, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[8] Ctr Behav Res Canc, Canc Council Victoria, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
关键词
e-cigarettes; nicotine; electronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS); simulation modelling; cost-utility analysis; uncertainty analyses;
D O I
10.1016/j.drugpo.2024.104476
中图分类号
R194 [卫生标准、卫生检查、医药管理];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: : Governments around the world are considering regulating access to nicotine e-cigarettes to prevent uptake among youth however people that smoke tobacco may use them to assist with smoking cessation. The health and cost implications of regulating e-cigarette use among populations are unknown but have been explored in modelling studies. We reviewed health economic evaluation and simulation modelling studies that assessed long-term consequences and interpret their potential usefulness for decision-makers. Methods: : A systematic review with a narrative synthesis was undertaken. Six databases were searched for modelling studies evaluating population-level e-cigarette control policies or interventions restricting e-cigarette use versus more liberalized use. Studies were required to report the outcomes of life years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and/or healthcare costs. The quality of the studies was assessed using two quality assessment tools. Results: : In total, 15 studies were included with nine for the United States and one each for the United Kingdom, Italy, Australia, Singapore, Canada, and New Zealand. Three studies included cost-utility analyses. Most studies involved health state transition (or Markov) closed cohort models. Many studies had limitations with their model structures, data input quality and transparency, and insufficient analyses handling model uncertainty. Findings were mixed with 11 studies concluding that policies permitting e-cigarette use lead to net benefits and 4 studies concluding net losses in life-years or QALYs and/or healthcare costs.Five studies had industry conflicts of interest. Conclusions: : While authors did conclude net benefit than net harm in more of the studies so far conducted, the significant limitations that we identified with many of the studies in this review, make it uncertain whether or not countries can expect net population harms or benefits of restrictive versus unrestrictive e-cigarette policies. The generalizability of the findings is limited for decision-makers. In light of the deep uncertainty around the health and economic outcomes of e-cigarettes, simulation modelling methods and uncertainty analyses should be strengthened.
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 43 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 2015, LANCET, V386, P829, DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00042-2
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2023, Who report on the global tobacco epidemic, 2023: Protect people from tobacco smoke (1470-2045)
  • [3] E-cigarette use and combustible tobacco cigarette smoking uptake among non-smokers, including relapse in former smokers: umbrella review, systematic review and meta-analysis
    Baenziger, Olivia Nina
    Ford, Laura
    Yazidjoglou, Amelia
    Joshy, Grace
    Banks, Emily
    [J]. BMJ OPEN, 2021, 11 (03):
  • [4] Banks E., 2020, SUMMARY REPORT USE E
  • [5] Longer-term use of electronic cigarettes when provided as a stop smoking aid: Systematic review with meta-analyses
    Butler, Ailsa R.
    Lindson, Nicola
    Fanshawe, Thomas R.
    Theodoulou, Annika
    Begh, Rachna
    Hajek, Peter
    McRobbie, Hayden
    Bullen, Chris
    Notley, Caitlin
    Rigotti, Nancy A.
    Hartmann-Boyce, Jamie
    [J]. PREVENTIVE MEDICINE, 2022, 165
  • [6] Investigating the Health Effects of 3 Coexisting Tobacco-Related Products Using System Dynamics Population Modeling: An Italian Population Case Study
    Camacho, Oscar M.
    Hill, Andrew
    Fiebelkorn, Stacy
    Williams, Aaron
    Murphy, James
    [J]. FRONTIERS IN PUBLIC HEALTH, 2021, 9
  • [7] Modeling Good Research Practices-Overview: A Report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-1
    Caro, J. Jaime
    Briggs, Andrew H.
    Siebert, Uwe
    Kuntz, Karen M.
    [J]. MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 2012, 32 (05) : 667 - 677
  • [8] Chu KH, 2020, HEALTH EDUC BEHAV, V47, P191, DOI [10.1177/1090198119876242, 10.1177%2F1090198119876242]
  • [9] Using Cost-Effectiveness Analysis to Address Health Equity Concerns
    Cookson, Richard
    Mirelman, Andrew J.
    Griffin, Susan
    Asaria, Miqdad
    Dawkins, Bryony
    Norheim, Ole Frithjof
    Verguet, Stephane
    Culyer, Anthony J.
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2017, 20 (02) : 206 - 212
  • [10] Evaluating smoking control policies in the e-cigarette era: a modelling study
    Doan, Thi Thanh Tra
    Tan, Ken Wei
    Dickens, Borame Sue Lee
    Lean, Yin Ai
    Yang, Qianyu
    Cook, Alex R.
    [J]. TOBACCO CONTROL, 2020, 29 (05) : 522 - 530