The Cost-Effectiveness of Primary Prevention Interventions for Skin Cancer: An Updated Systematic Review

IF 3.1 4区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Louisa G. Collins, Ryan Gage, Craig Sinclair, Daniel Lindsay
{"title":"The Cost-Effectiveness of Primary Prevention Interventions for Skin Cancer: An Updated Systematic Review","authors":"Louisa G. Collins,&nbsp;Ryan Gage,&nbsp;Craig Sinclair,&nbsp;Daniel Lindsay","doi":"10.1007/s40258-024-00892-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Preventing the onset of skin malignancies is feasible by reducing exposure to ultraviolet radiation. We reviewed published economic evaluations of primary prevention initiatives in the past decade, to support investment decisions for skin cancer prevention.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>We assessed cost-effectiveness, cost-utility and benefit-cost analyses published from 1 September 2013. Seven databases were searched on 18 July 2023 and updated on 15 November 2023. Studies must have reported outcomes in terms of monetary costs, life years, quality-adjusted life years or variant thereof. A narrative synthesis was undertaken and reporting quality was assessed by three reviewers using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>In total, 12 studies were included with five studies located in Australia; three in North America and the remaining four in Europe. Interventions included restricting the use of indoor tanning devices (7 studies), television advertising, multi-component sun safety campaigns, shade structures plus protective clothing provision for outdoor workers and provision of melanoma genomic risk information to individuals. Most studies constructed Markov cohort models and adopted a societal cost perspective. Overall, the reporting quality of the studies was high. Studies found highly favourable returns on investment ranging from US$0.35 for every $1 spent on prevention, up to €3.60 for every €1 spent. Other studies showed substantial skin cancers avoided, gains in life years, quality-adjusted survival, and societal cost savings.</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>From both population health and economic perspectives, allocating limited health care resources to primary prevention of skin cancer is highly favourable.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8065,"journal":{"name":"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy","volume":"22 5","pages":"685 - 700"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40258-024-00892-2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

Preventing the onset of skin malignancies is feasible by reducing exposure to ultraviolet radiation. We reviewed published economic evaluations of primary prevention initiatives in the past decade, to support investment decisions for skin cancer prevention.

Methods

We assessed cost-effectiveness, cost-utility and benefit-cost analyses published from 1 September 2013. Seven databases were searched on 18 July 2023 and updated on 15 November 2023. Studies must have reported outcomes in terms of monetary costs, life years, quality-adjusted life years or variant thereof. A narrative synthesis was undertaken and reporting quality was assessed by three reviewers using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist.

Results

In total, 12 studies were included with five studies located in Australia; three in North America and the remaining four in Europe. Interventions included restricting the use of indoor tanning devices (7 studies), television advertising, multi-component sun safety campaigns, shade structures plus protective clothing provision for outdoor workers and provision of melanoma genomic risk information to individuals. Most studies constructed Markov cohort models and adopted a societal cost perspective. Overall, the reporting quality of the studies was high. Studies found highly favourable returns on investment ranging from US$0.35 for every $1 spent on prevention, up to €3.60 for every €1 spent. Other studies showed substantial skin cancers avoided, gains in life years, quality-adjusted survival, and societal cost savings.

Conclusions

From both population health and economic perspectives, allocating limited health care resources to primary prevention of skin cancer is highly favourable.

Abstract Image

皮肤癌初级预防干预措施的成本效益:最新系统综述。
目的:通过减少紫外线辐射,预防皮肤恶性肿瘤的发生是可行的。我们回顾了过去十年间已发表的初级预防措施的经济评估,以支持皮肤癌预防的投资决策:我们对 2013 年 9 月 1 日以来发表的成本效益、成本效用和效益成本分析进行了评估。我们于 2023 年 7 月 18 日检索了七个数据库,并于 2023 年 11 月 15 日进行了更新。研究必须以货币成本、生命年、质量调整生命年或其变体的形式报告结果。三位评审员使用《卫生经济评价综合报告标准》核对表进行了叙述性综合和报告质量评估:共纳入了 12 项研究,其中 5 项在澳大利亚,3 项在北美,其余 4 项在欧洲。干预措施包括限制使用室内日晒设备(7 项研究)、电视广告、多成分防晒安全运动、为户外工作者提供遮阳设施和防护服以及向个人提供黑色素瘤基因组风险信息。大多数研究都构建了马尔科夫队列模型,并采用了社会成本视角。总体而言,这些研究的报告质量较高。研究发现,投资回报非常可观,从每花费 1 美元用于预防,可获得 0.35 美元的回报,到每花费 1 欧元,可获得 3.60 欧元的回报。其他研究显示,大量的皮肤癌得以避免,生命年数增加,质量调整后生存率提高,社会成本得以节约:从人口健康和经济角度来看,将有限的医疗资源用于皮肤癌的初级预防都是非常有利的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics and Econometrics
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
2.80%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: Applied Health Economics and Health Policy provides timely publication of cutting-edge research and expert opinion from this increasingly important field, making it a vital resource for payers, providers and researchers alike. The journal includes high quality economic research and reviews of all aspects of healthcare from various perspectives and countries, designed to communicate the latest applied information in health economics and health policy. While emphasis is placed on information with practical applications, a strong basis of underlying scientific rigor is maintained.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信