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

Louisa G. Collins, Ryan Gage, Craig Sinclair and Daniel Lindsay ()
Additional contact information
Louisa G. Collins: QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Royal Brisbane Hospital
Ryan Gage: University of Otago Wellington
Craig Sinclair: Cancer Council Victoria
Daniel Lindsay: QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Royal Brisbane Hospital

Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, 2024, vol. 22, issue 5, No 7, 685-700

Abstract: 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.

Date: 2024
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40258-024-00892-2 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:22:y:2024:i:5:d:10.1007_s40258-024-00892-2

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40258

DOI: 10.1007/s40258-024-00892-2

Access Statistics for this article

Applied Health Economics and Health Policy is currently edited by Timothy Wrightson

More articles in Applied Health Economics and Health Policy from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().