Suppr超能文献

用于增加烟草依赖治疗使用的医疗保健融资系统。

Healthcare financing systems for increasing the use of tobacco dependence treatment.

作者信息

Reda Ayalu A, Kotz Daniel, Evers Silvia M A A, van Schayck Constant Paul

机构信息

Department of General Practice, School of Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Maastricht University Medical Center,Maastricht, Netherlands.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Jun 13(6):CD004305. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004305.pub4.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

We hypothesized that provision of financial assistance for smokers trying to quit, or reimbursement of their care providers, could lead to an increased rate of successful quit attempts.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this review was to assess the impact of reducing the costs of providing or using smoking cessation treatment through healthcare financing interventions on abstinence from smoking. The secondary objectives were to examine the effects of different levels of financial support on the use and/or prescription of smoking cessation treatment and on the number of smokers making a quit attempt.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register in April 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled trials and interrupted time series studies involving financial benefit interventions to smokers or their healthcare providers or both.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the quality of the included studies. Risk ratios (RR) were calculated for individual studies on an intention-to-treat basis and meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model. We included economic evaluations when a study presented the costs and effects of two or more alternatives.

MAIN RESULTS

We found eleven trials involving financial interventions directed at smokers and healthcare providers.Full financial interventions directed at smokers had a statistically significant favourable effect on abstinence at six months or greater when compared to no intervention (RR 2.45, 95% CI 1.17 to 5.12, I² = 59%, 4 studies). There was also a significant effect of full financial interventions when compared to no interventions on the number of participants making a quit attempt (RR 1.11, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.32, I² = 15%) and use of smoking cessation treatment (NRT: RR 1.83, 95% CI 1.55 to 2.15, I² = 43%; bupropion: RR 3.22, 95% CI 1.41 to 7.34, I² = 71%; behavioural therapy: RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.65). There was no evidence of an effect on smoking cessation when we pooled two trials of financial incentives directed at healthcare providers (RR 1.16, CI 0.98 to 1.37, I² = 0%). Comparisons of full coverage with partial coverage, partial coverage with no coverage, and partial coverage with another partial coverage intervention did not detect significant effects. Comparison of full coverage with partial or no coverage resulted in costs per additional quitter ranging from $119 to $6450.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Full financial interventions directed at smokers when compared to no financial interventions increase the proportion of smokers who attempt to quit, use smoking cessation treatments, and succeed in quitting.  The absolute differences are small but the costs per additional quitter are low to moderate. We did not detect an effect on smoking cessation from financial incentives directed at healthcare providers. The methodological qualities of the included studies need to be taken into consideration when interpreting the results.

摘要

背景

我们推测,为试图戒烟的吸烟者提供经济援助或报销其医疗服务提供者的费用,可能会提高成功戒烟尝试的比率。

目的

本综述的主要目的是评估通过医疗保健融资干预措施降低提供或使用戒烟治疗的成本对戒烟的影响。次要目的是研究不同水平的经济支持对戒烟治疗的使用和/或处方以及尝试戒烟的吸烟者数量的影响。

检索方法

我们于2012年4月检索了Cochrane烟草成瘾小组专业注册库。

选择标准

我们纳入了涉及对吸烟者或其医疗服务提供者或两者进行经济利益干预的随机对照试验(RCT)、对照试验和中断时间序列研究。

数据收集与分析

两名综述作者独立提取数据并评估纳入研究的质量。对个体研究按意向性分析计算风险比(RR),并使用随机效应模型进行荟萃分析。当一项研究呈现两种或更多替代方案的成本和效果时,我们纳入经济评估。

主要结果

我们发现了11项涉及针对吸烟者和医疗服务提供者的经济干预的试验。与无干预相比,针对吸烟者的全面经济干预在6个月或更长时间的戒烟方面具有统计学上显著的有利效果(RR 2.45,95%CI 1.17至5.12,I² = 59%,4项研究)。与无干预相比,全面经济干预在尝试戒烟的参与者数量(RR 1.11,95%CI 1.04至1.32,I² = 15%)和戒烟治疗的使用方面(尼古丁替代疗法:RR 1.83,95%CI 1.55至2.15,I² = 43%;安非他酮:RR 3.22,95%CI 1.41至7.34,I² = 71%;行为疗法:RR 1.77,95%CI 1.19至2.65)也有显著效果。当我们汇总两项针对医疗服务提供者的经济激励试验时,没有证据表明对戒烟有影响(RR 1.16,CI 0.98至1.37,I² = 0%)。全面覆盖与部分覆盖、部分覆盖与无覆盖以及部分覆盖与另一种部分覆盖干预的比较未发现显著效果。全面覆盖与部分或无覆盖的比较导致每增加一名戒烟者的成本在119美元至6450美元之间。

作者结论

与无经济干预相比,针对吸烟者的全面经济干预增加了尝试戒烟、使用戒烟治疗并成功戒烟的吸烟者比例。绝对差异较小,但每增加一名戒烟者的成本为低到中等。我们未发现针对医疗服务提供者的经济激励对戒烟有影响。在解释结果时需要考虑纳入研究的方法学质量。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验