Understanding perceived availability and importance of tobacco control interventions to inform European adoption of a UK economic model: A cross-sectional study

Puttarin Kulchaitanaroaj, Z. Kaló, Robert West, Kei Long Cheung, Silvia Evers, Z. Vokó, Mickael Hiligsmann, Hein De Vries, Lesley Owen, Marta Trapero-Bertran, Reiner Leidl, Subhash Pokhrel

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: The evidence on the extent to which stakeholders in different European countries agree with availability and importance of tobacco-control interventions is limited. This study assessed and compared stakeholders' views from five European countries and compared the perceived ranking of interventions with evidence-based ranking using cost-effectiveness data. Methods: An interview survey (face-to-face, by phone or Skype) was conducted between April and July 2014 with five categories of stakeholders - decision makers, service purchasers, service providers, evidence generators and health promotion advocates - from Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands, Spain, and the United Kingdom. A list of potential stakeholders drawn from the research team's contacts and snowballing served as the sampling frame. An email invitation was sent to all stakeholders in this list and recruitment was based on positive replies. Respondents were asked to rate availability and importance of 30 tobacco control interventions. Kappa coefficients assessed agreement of stakeholders' views. A mean importance score for each intervention was used to rank the interventions. This ranking was compared with the ranking based on cost-effectiveness data from a published review. Results: Ninety-three stakeholders (55.7% response rate) completed the survey: 18.3% were from Germany, 17.2% from Hungary, 30.1% from the Netherlands, 19.4% from Spain, and 15.1% from the UK. Of those, 31.2% were decision makers, 26.9% evidence generators, 19.4% service providers, 15.1% health-promotion advocates, and 7.5% purchasers of services/pharmaceutical products. Smoking restrictions in public areas were rated as the most important intervention (mean score = 1.89). The agreement on availability of interventions between the stakeholders was very low (kappa = 0.098; 95% CI = [0.085, 0.111] but the agreement on the importance of the interventions was fair (kappa = 0.239; 95% CI = [0.208, 0.253]). A correlation was found between availability and importance rankings for stage-based interventions. The importance ranking was not statistically concordant with the ranking based on published cost-effectiveness data (Kendall rank correlation coefficient = 0.40; p-value = 0.11; 95% CI = [- 0.09, 0.89]). Conclusions: The intrinsic differences in stakeholder views must be addressed while transferring economic evidence Europe-wide. Strong engagement with stakeholders, focussing on better communication, has a potential to mitigate this challenge.

Original languageEnglish
Article number115
JournalBMC Health Services Research
Volume18
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 14 2018

Fingerprint

Economic Models
Tobacco
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Hungary
Cross-Sectional Studies
Health Promotion
Netherlands
Spain
Germany
Smoking
Communication
Economics
Interviews
Research
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Surveys and Questionnaires

Keywords

  • Economic model
  • Evidence transferability
  • Smoking cessation
  • Tobacco control

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy

Cite this

Understanding perceived availability and importance of tobacco control interventions to inform European adoption of a UK economic model : A cross-sectional study. / Kulchaitanaroaj, Puttarin; Kaló, Z.; West, Robert; Cheung, Kei Long; Evers, Silvia; Vokó, Z.; Hiligsmann, Mickael; De Vries, Hein; Owen, Lesley; Trapero-Bertran, Marta; Leidl, Reiner; Pokhrel, Subhash.

In: BMC Health Services Research, Vol. 18, No. 1, 115, 14.02.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kulchaitanaroaj, Puttarin ; Kaló, Z. ; West, Robert ; Cheung, Kei Long ; Evers, Silvia ; Vokó, Z. ; Hiligsmann, Mickael ; De Vries, Hein ; Owen, Lesley ; Trapero-Bertran, Marta ; Leidl, Reiner ; Pokhrel, Subhash. / Understanding perceived availability and importance of tobacco control interventions to inform European adoption of a UK economic model : A cross-sectional study. In: BMC Health Services Research. 2018 ; Vol. 18, No. 1.
@article{fe5b47b65bea4ae8ac260982592feafa,
title = "Understanding perceived availability and importance of tobacco control interventions to inform European adoption of a UK economic model: A cross-sectional study",
abstract = "Background: The evidence on the extent to which stakeholders in different European countries agree with availability and importance of tobacco-control interventions is limited. This study assessed and compared stakeholders' views from five European countries and compared the perceived ranking of interventions with evidence-based ranking using cost-effectiveness data. Methods: An interview survey (face-to-face, by phone or Skype) was conducted between April and July 2014 with five categories of stakeholders - decision makers, service purchasers, service providers, evidence generators and health promotion advocates - from Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands, Spain, and the United Kingdom. A list of potential stakeholders drawn from the research team's contacts and snowballing served as the sampling frame. An email invitation was sent to all stakeholders in this list and recruitment was based on positive replies. Respondents were asked to rate availability and importance of 30 tobacco control interventions. Kappa coefficients assessed agreement of stakeholders' views. A mean importance score for each intervention was used to rank the interventions. This ranking was compared with the ranking based on cost-effectiveness data from a published review. Results: Ninety-three stakeholders (55.7{\%} response rate) completed the survey: 18.3{\%} were from Germany, 17.2{\%} from Hungary, 30.1{\%} from the Netherlands, 19.4{\%} from Spain, and 15.1{\%} from the UK. Of those, 31.2{\%} were decision makers, 26.9{\%} evidence generators, 19.4{\%} service providers, 15.1{\%} health-promotion advocates, and 7.5{\%} purchasers of services/pharmaceutical products. Smoking restrictions in public areas were rated as the most important intervention (mean score = 1.89). The agreement on availability of interventions between the stakeholders was very low (kappa = 0.098; 95{\%} CI = [0.085, 0.111] but the agreement on the importance of the interventions was fair (kappa = 0.239; 95{\%} CI = [0.208, 0.253]). A correlation was found between availability and importance rankings for stage-based interventions. The importance ranking was not statistically concordant with the ranking based on published cost-effectiveness data (Kendall rank correlation coefficient = 0.40; p-value = 0.11; 95{\%} CI = [- 0.09, 0.89]). Conclusions: The intrinsic differences in stakeholder views must be addressed while transferring economic evidence Europe-wide. Strong engagement with stakeholders, focussing on better communication, has a potential to mitigate this challenge.",
keywords = "Economic model, Evidence transferability, Smoking cessation, Tobacco control",
author = "Puttarin Kulchaitanaroaj and Z. Kal{\'o} and Robert West and Cheung, {Kei Long} and Silvia Evers and Z. Vok{\'o} and Mickael Hiligsmann and {De Vries}, Hein and Lesley Owen and Marta Trapero-Bertran and Reiner Leidl and Subhash Pokhrel",
year = "2018",
month = "2",
day = "14",
doi = "10.1186/s12913-018-2923-2",
language = "English",
volume = "18",
journal = "BMC Health Services Research",
issn = "1472-6963",
publisher = "BioMed Central",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Understanding perceived availability and importance of tobacco control interventions to inform European adoption of a UK economic model

T2 - A cross-sectional study

AU - Kulchaitanaroaj, Puttarin

AU - Kaló, Z.

AU - West, Robert

AU - Cheung, Kei Long

AU - Evers, Silvia

AU - Vokó, Z.

AU - Hiligsmann, Mickael

AU - De Vries, Hein

AU - Owen, Lesley

AU - Trapero-Bertran, Marta

AU - Leidl, Reiner

AU - Pokhrel, Subhash

PY - 2018/2/14

Y1 - 2018/2/14

N2 - Background: The evidence on the extent to which stakeholders in different European countries agree with availability and importance of tobacco-control interventions is limited. This study assessed and compared stakeholders' views from five European countries and compared the perceived ranking of interventions with evidence-based ranking using cost-effectiveness data. Methods: An interview survey (face-to-face, by phone or Skype) was conducted between April and July 2014 with five categories of stakeholders - decision makers, service purchasers, service providers, evidence generators and health promotion advocates - from Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands, Spain, and the United Kingdom. A list of potential stakeholders drawn from the research team's contacts and snowballing served as the sampling frame. An email invitation was sent to all stakeholders in this list and recruitment was based on positive replies. Respondents were asked to rate availability and importance of 30 tobacco control interventions. Kappa coefficients assessed agreement of stakeholders' views. A mean importance score for each intervention was used to rank the interventions. This ranking was compared with the ranking based on cost-effectiveness data from a published review. Results: Ninety-three stakeholders (55.7% response rate) completed the survey: 18.3% were from Germany, 17.2% from Hungary, 30.1% from the Netherlands, 19.4% from Spain, and 15.1% from the UK. Of those, 31.2% were decision makers, 26.9% evidence generators, 19.4% service providers, 15.1% health-promotion advocates, and 7.5% purchasers of services/pharmaceutical products. Smoking restrictions in public areas were rated as the most important intervention (mean score = 1.89). The agreement on availability of interventions between the stakeholders was very low (kappa = 0.098; 95% CI = [0.085, 0.111] but the agreement on the importance of the interventions was fair (kappa = 0.239; 95% CI = [0.208, 0.253]). A correlation was found between availability and importance rankings for stage-based interventions. The importance ranking was not statistically concordant with the ranking based on published cost-effectiveness data (Kendall rank correlation coefficient = 0.40; p-value = 0.11; 95% CI = [- 0.09, 0.89]). Conclusions: The intrinsic differences in stakeholder views must be addressed while transferring economic evidence Europe-wide. Strong engagement with stakeholders, focussing on better communication, has a potential to mitigate this challenge.

AB - Background: The evidence on the extent to which stakeholders in different European countries agree with availability and importance of tobacco-control interventions is limited. This study assessed and compared stakeholders' views from five European countries and compared the perceived ranking of interventions with evidence-based ranking using cost-effectiveness data. Methods: An interview survey (face-to-face, by phone or Skype) was conducted between April and July 2014 with five categories of stakeholders - decision makers, service purchasers, service providers, evidence generators and health promotion advocates - from Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands, Spain, and the United Kingdom. A list of potential stakeholders drawn from the research team's contacts and snowballing served as the sampling frame. An email invitation was sent to all stakeholders in this list and recruitment was based on positive replies. Respondents were asked to rate availability and importance of 30 tobacco control interventions. Kappa coefficients assessed agreement of stakeholders' views. A mean importance score for each intervention was used to rank the interventions. This ranking was compared with the ranking based on cost-effectiveness data from a published review. Results: Ninety-three stakeholders (55.7% response rate) completed the survey: 18.3% were from Germany, 17.2% from Hungary, 30.1% from the Netherlands, 19.4% from Spain, and 15.1% from the UK. Of those, 31.2% were decision makers, 26.9% evidence generators, 19.4% service providers, 15.1% health-promotion advocates, and 7.5% purchasers of services/pharmaceutical products. Smoking restrictions in public areas were rated as the most important intervention (mean score = 1.89). The agreement on availability of interventions between the stakeholders was very low (kappa = 0.098; 95% CI = [0.085, 0.111] but the agreement on the importance of the interventions was fair (kappa = 0.239; 95% CI = [0.208, 0.253]). A correlation was found between availability and importance rankings for stage-based interventions. The importance ranking was not statistically concordant with the ranking based on published cost-effectiveness data (Kendall rank correlation coefficient = 0.40; p-value = 0.11; 95% CI = [- 0.09, 0.89]). Conclusions: The intrinsic differences in stakeholder views must be addressed while transferring economic evidence Europe-wide. Strong engagement with stakeholders, focussing on better communication, has a potential to mitigate this challenge.

KW - Economic model

KW - Evidence transferability

KW - Smoking cessation

KW - Tobacco control

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85042101007&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85042101007&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1186/s12913-018-2923-2

DO - 10.1186/s12913-018-2923-2

M3 - Article

C2 - 29444679

AN - SCOPUS:85042101007

VL - 18

JO - BMC Health Services Research

JF - BMC Health Services Research

SN - 1472-6963

IS - 1

M1 - 115

ER -