Dataset Information

The Economic Cost of Smoking in South Africa, 2016.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Chronic, noncommunicable diseases are on the rise globally, with tobacco consumption being an important contributing risk factor. These increases result in significant economic costs due to increased healthcare costs, productive lives lost, and productive days lost due to illness. Estimates of these economic costs are scarce in low- and middle-income countries.

Methods

Drawing on a diverse range of data sources, direct healthcare costs, and productivity losses due to illness and premature deaths were estimated using the cost-of-illness approach. The present value of lifetime earnings was used to estimate productivity losses from premature deaths.

Results

We estimate that 25 708 deaths among persons aged 35-74 in 2016 are smoking-attributable. The economic cost of smoking was R42 billion (US$2.88 billion), of which R14.48 billion was for healthcare costs (hospitalization and outpatient department visits). The economic cost of smoking amounted to 0.97% of the South African GDP in 2016, while the healthcare cost of smoking-related diseases was 4.1% of total South African health expenditure. The costs are lower for women because of their lower smoking prevalence.

Conclusion

The economic burden of smoking calls for a further scaling-up of tobacco-control interventions in South Africa.

Implications

This article addresses the paucity of research on the detailed economic costs of smoking in low-and middle-income countries, including South Africa. Our calculations, based on an extensive range of recent data, provide the most detailed estimate to date and include quantification of the direct and indirect costs of smoking in South Africa. We found that the magnitude of the costs related to smoking in South Africa is larger than in the previous estimates and that for every Rand received in the form of cigarette tax, society loses 3.43 Rands. This article provides an economic case for evidence-based tobacco control in South Africa.

SUBMITTER: Boachie MK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7822111 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe linkage between the socio-economic inequality and HIV outcomes was analysed using data from a population-based household survey that employed multistage-stratified sampling. The goal is to help refocus attention on how HIV is linked to inequalities.MethodsA socio-economic index (SEI) score, derived using Multiple Correspondence Analysis of measures of ownership of durable assets, was used to generate three SEI groups: Low (poorest), Middle, and Upper (no so poor). Distribution of HIV outcomes (i.e. HIV prevalence, access to HIV/AIDS information, level of stigma towards HIV/AIDS, perceived HIV risk and sexual behaviour) across the SEI groups, and other background characteristics was assessed using weighted data. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression was used to assess the covariates of the HIV outcomes across the socio-economic groups. The study sample include 14,384 adults 15 years and older.ResultsMore women (57.5%) than men (42.3%) were found in the poor SEI [P<0.001]. HIV prevalence was highest among the poor (20.8%) followed by those in the middle (15.9%) and those in the upper SEI (4.6%) [P<0.001]. It was also highest among women compared to men (19.7% versus 11.4% respectively) and among black Africans (20.2%) compared to other races [P<0.001]. Individuals in the upper SEI reported higher frequency of HIV testing (59.3%) compared to the low SEI (47.7%) [P< 0.001]. Only 20.5% of those in poor SEI had "good access to HIV/AIDS information" compared to 79.5% in the upper SEI (P<0.001). A higher percentage of the poor had a stigmatizing attitude towards HIV/AIDS (45.6%) compared to those in the upper SEI (34.8%) [P< 0.001]. There was a high personal HIV risk perception among the poor (40.0%) and it declined significantly to 10.9% in the upper SEI.ConclusionsOur findings underline the disproportionate burden of HIV disease and HIV fear among the poor and vulnerable in South Africa. The poor are further disadvantaged by lack of access to HIV information and HIV/AIDS services such as testing for HIV infection. There is a compelling urgency for the national HIV/AIDS response to maximizing program focus for the poor particularly women.