Are the "Best Buys" for Alcohol Control Still Valid? An Update on the Comparative Cost-Effectiveness of Alcohol Control Strategies at the Global Level
Are the "Best Buys" for Alcohol Control Still Valid? An Update on the Comparative Cost-Effectiveness of Alcohol Control Strategies at the Global Level
复制标题
DOI：
10.15288/jsad.2018.79.514
复制
发表时间：
2018-07-01
影响因子：
3.4
通讯作者：
Rehm, Juergen
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Chisholm, Dan;Moro, Daniela;Rehm, Juergen
目的：关于酒精控制战略的相对成本效益的证据是对公共政策和资源分配的相关投入。在全球一级，这一证据已被用来确定预防和控制非传染性疾病的所谓“最合算”办法。本文使用全球证据的酒精使用暴露和风险关系，以及干预成本和影响，重新审视一系列酒精控制策略的比较成本效益。方法：采用“广义”成本-效果分析方法。一个新的建模工具（OneHealth）被用来估计干预措施的人群水平的影响。减少有害使用酒精的干预措施包括简短的心理社会干预，消费税，以及制定和执行限制酒精营销，供应和酒后驾车的法律。2010年的成本以国际元估算，影响以健康寿命年表示。对低、中、高收入的16个国家进行了分析。结果：增加消费税成本低（
Objective: Evidence on the comparative cost-effectiveness of alcohol control strategies is a relevant input into public policy and resource allocation. At the global level, this evidence has been used to identify so-called best buys for noncommunicable disease prevention and control. This article uses global evidence on alcohol use exposures and risk relations, as well as on intervention costs and impacts, to re-examine the comparative cost-effectiveness of a range of alcohol control strategies. Method: A "generalized" approach to cost-effectiveness analysis was adopted. A new modeling tool (OneHealth) was used to estimate the population-level effects of interventions. Interventions that reduce the harmful use of alcohol included brief psychosocial interventions, excise taxes, and the enactment as well as enforcement of restrictions on alcohol marketing, availability, and drink-driving laws. Costs were estimated in international dollars for the year 2010 and effects expressed in healthy life years gained. Analysis was carried out for 16 countries spanning low-, middle-, and high-income settings. Results: Increasing excise taxes has a low cost (