Estimating the cost-effectiveness of brief interventions for heavy drinking in primary health care across Europe
Open accessAbstract
Background: Screening and Brief Interventions for alcohol are an effective public health measure to tackle alcohol-related harm, however relatively few countries across the European Union (EU) have implemented them widely. This may be due to a lack of understanding of the specific financial implications of such policies within each country. Methods: A novel 'meta-modelling' approach was developed based on previous SBI cost-effectiveness models for four EU countries. Data were collected on the key factors which drive cost-effectiveness for all 28 EU countries (mean per capita alcohol consumption, proportion of the population to be screened over a 10-year SBI programme; per capita alcohol-attributable mortality; per capita alcohol-attributable morbidity; mean cost of an alcohol-related hospitalisation and mean SBI-delivery staff cost). Regression analysis was used to fit two meta-models estimating net programme costs and Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) gained, to calculate cost-effectiveness estimates specific to each EU country. Results: Costs are dependent upon the proportion of the population covered by the screening programme, the country-specific per capita mortality and morbidity rate and the country-specific costs of GP care and hospitalisation. QALYs depend on the proportion of the population screened and per capita alcohol consumption. Despite large inter-country variability in factor values, SBI programmes are likely to be cost-effective in 24 out of 28 EU countries and cost-saving in 50% of countries. Conclusion: Implementing national programmes of SBI in primary health care would be a cost-effective means of reducing alcohol-attributable morbidity and deaths in almost all countries of the EU.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Alcohol screening and brief interventions in primary care settings are effective and cost-effective or cost-saving.
“In the past four decades, randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses have found alcohol SBI in primary care settings to be effective and cost-effective or cost-saving [6–13].”
From Factors influencing the implementation of screening and brief interventions for alcohol use in primary care practices: a systematic review using the COM-B system and Theoretical Domains Framework (2021) · cites this paper as [6]
The Discussion and Key points report that primary-care SBI is likely to be effective and cost-effective in most EU countries, with estimated savings in about half. But the Methods describe this paper as a modelling study, not a randomized controlled trial or meta-analysis; its cost findings are estimates rather than trial findings. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Rehm, J., Mathers, C., Popova, S., Thavorncharoensap, M., Teerawattananon, Y., & Patra, J. (2009) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(09)60746-7 · Cited by 3,870 · see citing works
The relation between different dimensions of alcohol consumption and burden of disease: an overview
Rehm, J., Baliunas, D., Borges, G. L. G., Graham, K., Irving, H., Kehoe, T., Parry, C. D., Patra, J., Popova, S., Poznyak, V., et al. (2010) · Addiction · doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010.02899.x · Cited by 1,174 · see citing works
The impact of brief alcohol interventions in primary healthcare: a systematic review of reviews
O'Donnell, A., Anderson, P., Newbury-Birch, D., Schulte, B., Schmidt, C., Reimer, J., & Kaner, E. (2014) · Alcohol and Alcoholism · doi:10.1093/alcalc/agt170 · Cited by 613 · see citing works
Self-citationPurshouse, R. C., Brennan, A., Rafia, R., Latimer, N. R., Archer, R. J., Angus, C. R., Preston, L. R., & Meier, P. S. (2013) · Alcohol and Alcoholism · doi:10.1093/alcalc/ags103 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Self-citationAngus, C., Scafato, E., Ghirini, S., Torbica, A., Ferre, F., Struzzo, P., Purshouse, R., & Brennan, A. (2014) · BMC Family Practice · doi:10.1186/1471-2296-15-26 · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 14
- Hutubessy R, Chisholm D, Edejer TT-T. Generalized cost-effectiveness analysis for national- level priority-setting in the health sector. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2003 Dec 19;1(1):8.
- Kaner EFS, Beyer F, Dickinson HO, Pienaar E, Campbell F, Schlesinger C, et al. Effectiveness of brief alcohol interventions in primary care populations. Cochrane database Syst Rev Online. Wiley Online Library; 2007;4(2):CD004148.
- Angus C, Latimer N, Preston L, Li J, Purshouse R. What are the Implications for Policy Makers? A Systematic Review of the Cost-Effectiveness of Screening and Brief Interventions for Alcohol Misuse in Primary Care. Front psychiatry. 2014 Jan;5:114.
- Shepard DS, Lwin AK, Barnett NP, Mastroleo N, Colby SM, Gwaltney C, et al. Cost- effectiveness of motivational intervention with significant others for patients with alcohol misuse. Addiction. 2016 May;111(5):832-9.
- Chisholm D, Rehm J, van Ommeren M, Monteiro M. Reducing the global burden of hazardous alcohol use: a comparative cost-effectiveness analysis. J Stud Alcohol. 2004;65:782-93.
- Anderson P, Wojnar M, Jakubczyk A, Gual A, Segura L, Sovinova H, et al. Managing alcohol problems in general practice in Europe: results from the European ODHIN survey of general practitioners. Alcohol Alcohol. Jan;49(5):531-9.
- Holmes J, Meng Y, Meier PS, Brennan A, Angus C, Campbell-Burton A, et al. Effects of minimum unit pricing for alcohol on different income and socioeconomic groups: a modelling study. Lancet. 2014 May 10;383(9929):1655-64.
- Thode HC. Statistical Tools for Simulation Practitioners. Technometrics. Taylor & Francis Group; 1988 Mar 23;30(4):464-464.
- Law AM. Simulation Modeling and Analysis: 4th Edition. McGraw-Hill Higher Education; 2006.
- Lhachimi SK, Nusselder WJ, Smit HA, van Baal P, Baili P, Bennett K, et al. DYNAMO-HIA--a Dynamic Modeling tool for generic Health Impact Assessments. PLoS One. Public Library of Science; 2012 Jan 10;7(5):e33317.
- Lhachimi SK, Cole KJ, Nusselder WJ, Smit HA, Baili P, Bennett K, et al. Health impacts of increasing alcohol prices in the European Union: a dynamic projection. Prev Med (Baltim). 2012 Sep;55(3):237-43.
- Bell M, Charles-Edwards E, Ueffing P, Stillwell J, Kupiszewski M, Kupiszewska D. Internal Migration and Development: Comparing Migration Intensities Around the World. Popul Dev Rev. 2015 Mar;41(1):33-58.
- Kroneman MW, Van der Zee J, Groot W. Income development of General Practitioners in eight European countries from 1975 to 2005. BMC Health Serv Res. 2009 Jan;9(1):26.
- Sassi F. Calculating QALYs, comparing QALY and DALY calculations. Health Policy Plan. 2006 Sep 1;21(5):402-8.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Rosário, F., Santos, M. I., Angus, K., Pas, L., Ribeiro, C., & Fitzgerald, N. (2021) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/s13012-020-01073-0 · Cited by 141 · see citing works
Rosário, F., Santos, M. I., Angus, K., Pas, L., & Fitzgerald, N. (2018) · Acta Médica Portuguesa · doi:10.20344/amp.9753 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Rosário, F., Vasiljevic, M., Pas, L., Fitzgerald, N., & Ribeiro, C. (2019) · Family Practice · doi:10.1093/fampra/cmy062 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
- Authors
- Angus, C., Thomas, C., Anderson, P., Meier, P. S., & Brennan, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Sheffield (GB)
- Newcastle University (GB)
- Venue
- The European Journal of Public Health
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2016-08-23
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- ckw122
- ISSN
- 1101-1262 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-360X
- OpenAlex
- W2515209542
- Cited by
- 57
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3
- FWCI
- 3.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- European Journal of Public Health (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
- ENLIGHTEN (Jurnal Bimbingan dan Konseling Islam) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- European Commission (259268)
- Medical Research Council (MR/K023195/1)
- Economic and Social Research Council (ES/G007489/1)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Alcohol Consumption and Health Effects
- Keywords
- screening and brief intervention, alcohol consumption, cost-effectiveness, primary care, alcohol-related harm, alcohol-attributable mortality, quality-adjusted life years, metamodeling, EU member states
- MeSH terms
- Alcoholism, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Europe, Humans, Primary Health Care, Public Health, Program Evaluation, Quality-Adjusted Life Years
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review