Next Article in Journal
Use of Multiple Tobacco and Tobacco-Like Products Including Heated Tobacco and E-Cigarettes in Japan: A Cross-Sectional Assessment of the 2017 JASTIS Study
Previous Article in Journal
Population Attributable Fraction of Early Age of Onset of Alcohol Use in Alcohol Abuse and Dependence: A 3-Year Follow-Up Study in University Students
Previous Article in Special Issue
The Role of Cohesion Policy Funds in Decreasing the Health Gaps Measured by the EURO-HEALTHY Population Health Index
Open AccessArticle

Ranking Preventive Interventions from Different Policy Domains: What Are the Most Cost-Effective Ways to Improve Public Health?

1
National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), 3720 BA Bilthoven, The Netherlands
2
Tilburg School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, University of Tilburg, 5000 Tilburg, The Netherlands
3
Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, 3584 CG Utrecht, The Netherlands
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(6), 2160; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17062160 (registering DOI)
Received: 29 January 2020 / Revised: 9 March 2020 / Accepted: 16 March 2020 / Published: 24 March 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue A More Sustainable and Healthier Future for All: What Works?)
It is widely acknowledged that in order to promote public health and prevent diseases, a wide range of scientific disciplines and sectors beyond the health sector need to be involved. Evidence-based interventions, beyond preventive health interventions targeting disease risk factors and interventions from other sectors, should be developed and implemented. Investing in these preventive health policies is challenging as budgets have to compete with other governmental expenditures. The current study aimed to identify, compare and rank cost-effective preventive interventions targeting metabolic, environmental, occupational and behavioral risk factors. To identify these interventions, a literature search was performed including original full economic evaluations of Western country interventions that had not yet been implemented in the Netherlands. Several workshops were held with experts from different disciplines. In total, 51 different interventions (including 13 cost saving interventions) were identified and ranked based on their incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and potential averted disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), resulting in two rankings of the most cost-effective interventions and one ranking of the 13 cost saving interventions. This approach, resulting in an intersectoral ranking, can assist policy makers in implementing cost-effective preventive action that considers not only the health sector, but also other sectors. View Full-Text
Keywords: cost-effectiveness; preventive interventions; cross-sectoral; ranking; health cost-effectiveness; preventive interventions; cross-sectoral; ranking; health
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

van der Vliet, N.; Suijkerbuijk, A.W.; de Blaeij, A.T.; de Wit, G.A.; van Gils, P.F.; Staatsen, B.A.; Maas, R.; Polder, J.J. Ranking Preventive Interventions from Different Policy Domains: What Are the Most Cost-Effective Ways to Improve Public Health? Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2160.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop