旨在预防、治疗和/或康复酒精相关疾病的干预措施的经济评价:系统综述。

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q3 SUBSTANCE ABUSE
Marta Trapero-Bertran, Dolors Gil-Doménech, Ana Magdalena Vargas-Martínez
{"title":"旨在预防、治疗和/或康复酒精相关疾病的干预措施的经济评价:系统综述。","authors":"Marta Trapero-Bertran, Dolors Gil-Doménech, Ana Magdalena Vargas-Martínez","doi":"10.20882/adicciones.1649","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The aim of this systematic literature review is to identify economic evaluations of programmes or interventions aimed at the prevention, treatment and rehabilitation of alcohol use disorders, as well as to determine those types of programmes, treatments or interventions that are efficient. The systematic literature review was conducted by searching the following databases: National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), Health Technology Assessment (HTA), MEDLINE Ovid and PubMed. The search terms used were in English. No time restriction was applied. A data extraction form was used to draw information. The systematic review follows the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) on reporting systematic reviews. The interventions were classified into three categories: \"A\" treatments for people with alcohol use disorders (tertiary prevention); \"B\" treatments for people at risk for alcohol-related problems (secondary prevention); \"C\" policy legislation and enforcement interventions (primary prevention). Furthermore, the \"A\" interventions were subclassified into psychological, pharmacological and combined interventions. The review included 63 papers. In terms of treatments for people with alcohol use disorders, any psychosocial intervention compared to no intervention appeared to be a dominant strategy. In terms of treatments for people at risk of alcohol-related problems, brief intervention appears to be dominant or cost-effective when compared to no intervention. Advertising controls, tax increases, licensing, legal drinking age, and mass media campaigns seem to be dominant or cost-effective strategies compared to no intervention or random breath testing. Previous reviews have been extended by depicting alcohol programmes according to their efficiency. Despite this, the available studies in this regard have heterogeneous approaches and most do not adequately define the costs included in their analyses. Therefore, it is necessary to encourage the evaluation of the efficiency of these types of interventions to aid decision-making in public health.</p>","PeriodicalId":55560,"journal":{"name":"Adicciones","volume":"0 0","pages":"325-348"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Economic evaluations of interventions aimed at the prevention, treatment and/or rehabilitation of alcohol-related disorders: A systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Marta Trapero-Bertran, Dolors Gil-Doménech, Ana Magdalena Vargas-Martínez\",\"doi\":\"10.20882/adicciones.1649\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The aim of this systematic literature review is to identify economic evaluations of programmes or interventions aimed at the prevention, treatment and rehabilitation of alcohol use disorders, as well as to determine those types of programmes, treatments or interventions that are efficient. The systematic literature review was conducted by searching the following databases: National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), Health Technology Assessment (HTA), MEDLINE Ovid and PubMed. The search terms used were in English. No time restriction was applied. A data extraction form was used to draw information. The systematic review follows the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) on reporting systematic reviews. The interventions were classified into three categories: \\\"A\\\" treatments for people with alcohol use disorders (tertiary prevention); \\\"B\\\" treatments for people at risk for alcohol-related problems (secondary prevention); \\\"C\\\" policy legislation and enforcement interventions (primary prevention). Furthermore, the \\\"A\\\" interventions were subclassified into psychological, pharmacological and combined interventions. The review included 63 papers. In terms of treatments for people with alcohol use disorders, any psychosocial intervention compared to no intervention appeared to be a dominant strategy. In terms of treatments for people at risk of alcohol-related problems, brief intervention appears to be dominant or cost-effective when compared to no intervention. Advertising controls, tax increases, licensing, legal drinking age, and mass media campaigns seem to be dominant or cost-effective strategies compared to no intervention or random breath testing. Previous reviews have been extended by depicting alcohol programmes according to their efficiency. Despite this, the available studies in this regard have heterogeneous approaches and most do not adequately define the costs included in their analyses. Therefore, it is necessary to encourage the evaluation of the efficiency of these types of interventions to aid decision-making in public health.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55560,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Adicciones\",\"volume\":\"0 0\",\"pages\":\"325-348\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Adicciones\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.20882/adicciones.1649\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SUBSTANCE ABUSE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Adicciones","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20882/adicciones.1649","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本系统文献综述的目的是确定对旨在预防、治疗和康复酒精使用障碍的方案或干预措施的经济评估,并确定有效的方案、治疗或干预措施类型。通过检索以下数据库进行系统的文献综述:国家卫生服务经济评估数据库(NHS EED)、卫生技术评估(HTA)、MEDLINE Ovid和PubMed。使用的搜索词是英文的。没有时间限制。数据提取表单用于绘制信息。系统审查遵循系统审查首选报告项目和荟萃分析协议(PRISMA-P)关于报告系统审查的建议。干预措施分为三类:针对酒精使用障碍患者的“A”治疗(三级预防);对有酒精相关问题风险的人进行“B”治疗(二级预防);“C”政策立法和执法干预措施(初级预防)。此外,“A”干预分为心理干预、药物干预和联合干预。审查包括63篇论文。就酒精使用障碍患者的治疗而言,与没有干预相比,任何心理社会干预似乎都是一种主导策略。就有酒精相关问题风险的人的治疗而言,与不干预相比,短暂干预似乎占主导地位或具有成本效益。与不干预或随机呼吸测试相比,广告控制、增税、许可证、法定饮酒年龄和大众媒体宣传似乎是占主导地位或具有成本效益的策略。先前的审查已经扩展,根据酒精计划的效率对其进行了描述。尽管如此,这方面的现有研究采用了不同的方法,大多数研究都没有充分定义其分析中包含的成本。因此,有必要鼓励对这类干预措施的效率进行评估,以帮助公共卫生决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Economic evaluations of interventions aimed at the prevention, treatment and/or rehabilitation of alcohol-related disorders: A systematic review.

The aim of this systematic literature review is to identify economic evaluations of programmes or interventions aimed at the prevention, treatment and rehabilitation of alcohol use disorders, as well as to determine those types of programmes, treatments or interventions that are efficient. The systematic literature review was conducted by searching the following databases: National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), Health Technology Assessment (HTA), MEDLINE Ovid and PubMed. The search terms used were in English. No time restriction was applied. A data extraction form was used to draw information. The systematic review follows the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) on reporting systematic reviews. The interventions were classified into three categories: "A" treatments for people with alcohol use disorders (tertiary prevention); "B" treatments for people at risk for alcohol-related problems (secondary prevention); "C" policy legislation and enforcement interventions (primary prevention). Furthermore, the "A" interventions were subclassified into psychological, pharmacological and combined interventions. The review included 63 papers. In terms of treatments for people with alcohol use disorders, any psychosocial intervention compared to no intervention appeared to be a dominant strategy. In terms of treatments for people at risk of alcohol-related problems, brief intervention appears to be dominant or cost-effective when compared to no intervention. Advertising controls, tax increases, licensing, legal drinking age, and mass media campaigns seem to be dominant or cost-effective strategies compared to no intervention or random breath testing. Previous reviews have been extended by depicting alcohol programmes according to their efficiency. Despite this, the available studies in this regard have heterogeneous approaches and most do not adequately define the costs included in their analyses. Therefore, it is necessary to encourage the evaluation of the efficiency of these types of interventions to aid decision-making in public health.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Adicciones
Adicciones SUBSTANCE ABUSE-
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
10.00%
发文量
36
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Adicciones publica artículos originales sobre el tratamiento, la prevención, estudios básicos y descriptivos en el campo de las adicciones, como son las drogas ilegales, el alcohol, el tabaco o cualquier otra adicción, procedentes de distintas disciplinas (medicina, psicología, investigación básica, investigación social, etc.). Todos los artículos son seleccionados después de pasar un proceso de revisión anónimo hecho por expertos en ese tema.
×
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