Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2016 May;42(3):296-305.
doi: 10.3109/00952990.2015.1081913. Epub 2015 Oct 20.

Cost-effectiveness of a voucher-based intervention for smoking cessation

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Cost-effectiveness of a voucher-based intervention for smoking cessation

Carla López-Núñez et al. Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 2016 May.

Abstract

Background: Contingency management (CM) has been shown to be effective in reducing smoking consumption, but has traditionally been criticized for its costs.

Objectives: This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of using a voucher-based CM protocol added to a cognitive behavioral treatment (CBT) for smoking cessation among treatment-seeking patients from the general population.

Methods: A total of 92 patients were randomly assigned to CBT or CBT plus CM for abstinence. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated by dividing the increase in costs by the increase in effects (continuous abstinence, longest duration of abstinence at 6-month follow-up and cotinine results during the treatment). An acceptability curve illustrated the statistical uncertainty surrounding the cost-effectiveness estimate. We also determined the optimum cost per participant for predicting the smoking status at 6-month follow-up.

Results: The average cost per participant in the CBT condition was €138.73 (US$ 150.23) as opposed to €411.61 (US$ 445.73) in the CBT plus CM condition (p < 0.01). The incremental cost of using voucher-based CM to increase the number of participants that maintained abstinence at 6-month follow-up by one extra participant was €68.22 (US$ 73.88), and to lengthen the longest duration of abstinence by 1 week was €53.92 (US$ 58.39). The incremental cost to obtain an extra cotinine-negative result was €181.90 (US$ 196.98).

Conclusion: Compared with CBT alone, the voucher-based protocol required additional costs but achieved significantly better outcomes. These results will allow stakeholders to make policy decisions about CM implementation for smoking cessation in the broader community.

Keywords: Cost-effectiveness; community setting; contingency management; smoking cessation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources