首页> 外文期刊>International journal of applied mechanics >Increasing the Price of Alcohol as an Obesity Prevention Measure: The Potential Cost-Effectiveness of Introducing a Uniform Volumetric Tax and a Minimum Floor Price on Alcohol in Australia
【24h】

Increasing the Price of Alcohol as an Obesity Prevention Measure: The Potential Cost-Effectiveness of Introducing a Uniform Volumetric Tax and a Minimum Floor Price on Alcohol in Australia

机译:将酗酒的价格提高了肥胖预防措施:在澳大利亚造成统一的体积税和最低楼层价格的潜在成本效益

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The objective of this study was to estimate, from an obesity prevention perspective, the cost-effectiveness of two potential policies that increase the price of alcohol in Australia: a volumetric tax applied to all alcohol (Intervention 1) and a minimum unit floor price (Intervention 2). Estimated changes in alcoholic drink consumption and corresponding changes in energy intake were calculated using the 2011-12 Australian Health Survey data, published price elasticities, and nutrition information. The incremental changes in body mass index (BMI), BMI-related disease outcomes, healthcare costs, and Health Adjusted Life Years (HALYs) were estimated using a validated model. Costs associated with each intervention were estimated for government and industry. Both interventions were estimated to lead to reductions in mean alcohol consumption (Intervention 1: 20.7% (95% Uncertainty Interval (UI): 20.2% to 21.1%); Intervention 2: 9.2% (95% UI: 8.9% to 9.6%)); reductions in mean population body weight (Intervention 1: 0.9 kg (95% UI: 0.84 to 0.96); Intervention 2: 0.45 kg (95% UI: 0.42 to 0.48)); HALYs gained (Intervention 1: 566,648 (95% UI: 497,431 to 647,262); Intervention 2: 317,653 (95% UI: 276,334 to 361,573)); and healthcare cost savings (Intervention 1: $5.8 billion (B) (95% UI: $5.1B to $6.6B); Intervention 2: $3.3B (95% UI: $2.9B to $3.7B)). Intervention costs were estimated as $24M for Intervention 1 and $30M for Intervention 2. Both interventions were dominant, resulting in health gains and cost savings. Increasing the price of alcohol is likely to be cost-effective from an obesity prevention perspective in the Australian context, provided consumers substitute alcoholic beverages with low or no kilojoule alternatives.
机译:本研究的目的是从肥胖预防的角度来估计,这两种潜在政策的成本效益增加了澳大利亚酒精价格:适用于所有酒精(干预1)和最低单位楼层价格的体积税(干预2)。使用2011-12澳大利亚健康调查数据,公布的价格弹性和营养信息计算了估计酒精饮料消费和相应的能量摄入变化。使用经过验证的模型估算了体重指数(BMI),BMI相关疾病结果,医疗成本和健康调整后生命年份(哈利)的增量变化。政府和行业估计与每种干预相关的成本。估计两种干预措施均可导致平均饮酒消耗(1:20.7%(95%):20.2%至21.1%);干预2:9.2%(95%UI:8.9%至9.6%) );平均群体体重减少(干预1:0.9公斤(95%UI:0.84至0.96);干预2:0.45kg(95%UI:0.42至0.48));获得哈利(干预1:566,648(95%UI:497,431至647,262);干预2:317,653(95%UI:276,334至361,573));和医疗保健成本节约(干预1:58亿美元(B)(95%UI:$ 5.1B至6.6亿美元);干预2:3.3B(95%UI:$ 2.9B至3.7亿美元))。干预费用估计为2400万美元,干预1和30米的干预2.两种干预措施都占主导地位,导致卫生收益和成本节约。增加醇的饮酒价格可能与澳大利亚背景下的肥胖预防观点具有成本效益,为消费者用低或没有千焦耳替代品替代酒精饮料。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号