Skip Navigation

Cost-effectiveness of nicotine patches for smoking cessation in pregnancy: A placebo randomised controlled trial (SNAP)

  1. Tim Coleman, MD2
  1. 1Mental health and Addiction Research Group, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, Heslington, York, YO10 5DD, UK
  2. 2 Division of Primary Care, NIHR School for Primary Care Research and UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, NG7 2UH, UK
  1. Corresponding author: Holly N. Essex Contact email: holly.essex{at}york.ac.uk
  • Received July 30, 2014.

Abstract

Introduction: Smoking during pregnancy is the most important, preventable cause of adverse pregnancy outcomes including miscarriage, premature birth and low birth weight, with huge financial costs to the NHS. However, there are very few published economic evaluations of smoking cessation interventions in pregnancy and previous studies are predominantly US-based and do not present incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). A number of studies have demonstrated cost-effectiveness of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) in the general population, but this has yet to be tested among pregnant smokers.

Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis was undertaken alongside the SNAP trial to compare NRT patches plus behavioural support to behavioural support alone, for pregnant women who smoked.

Results: At delivery, biochemically verified quit rates were slightly higher at 9.4% in the NRT group compared to 7.6% in the control group (odds ratio: 1.26, 95% CI: 0.82-1.96), at an increased cost of around £90 per participant. Higher costs in the NRT group were mainly attributable to the cost of NRT patches (mean = £46.07). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio associated with NRT was £4,926 per quitter and a sensitivity analysis including only singleton births yielded an ICER of £4,156 per quitter. However, wide confidence intervals indicated a high level of uncertainty.

Conclusions: Without a specific willingness to pay threshold, and due to high levels of statistical uncertainty, it is hard to determine the cost-effectiveness of NRT in this population. Furthermore, future research should address compliance issues, as these may dilute any potential effects of NRT, thus reducing the cost-effectiveness.

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.