Skip to main content

Costs of Smoking-Attributable Productivity Losses in Poland

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Respiratory Regulation - Clinical Advances

Part of the book series: Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology ((AEMB,volume 755))

Abstract

In Poland smoking poses a severe socioeconomic problem. Not only does tobacco consumption cause an increase in direct medical costs due to the necessity for treatment of smoking-attributable diseases, but it also generates indirect costs due to productivity losses. The aim of this paper was to estimate the annual productivity loss due to smoking in Poland from the societal perspective and to compare the obtained results with the equivalent research in other selected countries (Germany, Sweden, and USA). The assessment was performed by the use of the human capital approach, considering loss of productivity until achieving the retirement age and gross income. Four distinct components of indirect costs of nicotine consumption were included: costs of premature mortality, costs of acquired disability, as well as costs of absenteeism and presenteeism caused by smokers. The costs of smoking-attributable productivity loss within a year amount to more than 15 billion PLN (1 Euro approx. 4 PLN) which is about 402 PLN per capita and 1418 PLN per smoker. This represents about 2.6% of Polish annual Gross Domestic Product (GDP), which is more than in Germany, Sweden, or the USA. This amount clearly shows the enormous socioeconomic burden and suggests the need for taking measures to reduce it.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For such generalized disease groups SAF set by Peto and Lopez (2006) was used.

References

  • Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine: Report of the Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. (1996). M.R. Gold, J.E. Siegel, L.B. Russell, & M.C. Weinstein (Eds.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolin, K., & Lindgren, B. (2007). Smoking, health cost, and loss of productivity in Sweden 2001. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 35, 187–196.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brouwer, W. B. F., van Exel, N. J. A., Baltussen, R. M. P. M., & Rutten, F. F. H. (2006). A dollar is a dollar is a dollar – Or is it? Value in Health, 9, 341–347.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). (2002). Annual smoking-attributable mortality, years of potential life lost, and economic costs – United States, 1995–1999. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 51, 300–303.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fagerstrom, K. (2002). The epidemiology of smoking: Health consequences and benefits of cessation. Drugs, 62(Suppl 2), 1–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Glied, S. (1996). Estimating the indirect cost of illness: An assessment of the forgone earnings approach. American Journal of Public Health, 86, 1723–1728.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jakubczyk, M., Wrona, W., Macioch, T., Golicki, D., Niewada, M., & Hermanowski, T. (2010). Indirect costs in the evaluation of medical technologies. Polski Merkuriusz Lekarski, 28(163), 42–45 (in Polish).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, K., Buxton, M. J., Jones, D. R., & Fitzpatrick, R. (1999). Assessing the costs of healthcare technologies in clinical trials. Health Technology Assessment, 3, 1–76.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Jonsson, B. (2009). Ten arguments for a societal perspective in the economic evaluation of medical innovations. The European Journal of Health Economics, 10, 357–359.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Krzyzanowska, A., & Glogowski, C. (2004). Smoking in the world. Economic consequences. Farmakoekonomika, 2, 38–42 (in Polish).

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin-Epstein, J. (2005). Presenteeism and paid sick days. CLASP. www.clasp.org/admin/site/publications/files/0212.pdf. Accessed 15 Aug 2011.

  • Liljas, B. (1998). How to calculate indirect costs in economic evaluations. Pharmaeconomics, 13, 1–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Maciag, A. (2008). The importance of indirect costs in the treatment of chronic diseases in the socio-economic perspective. Problemy Higieny i Epidemiologii, 89, 18–20 (in Polish).

    Google Scholar 

  • McCormack, C. (2009). The problem of presenteeism – An expanded definition of the topic. www.ColmMcCormack.com. Accessed 15 Aug 2011.

  • Middaugh, D. J. (2006). Presenteeism: Sick and tired at work. Medsurg Nursing, 15, 103–105.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parrott, S., Godfrey, C., & Raw, M. (2000). Costs of employee smoking in the workplace in Scotland. Tobacco Control, 9, 187–192.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Peto, R., Lopez, A. D., Boreham, J., & Thun, M. J. (2006). Mortaily from smoking in developed countries 1950–2000, 2nd ed. International Union Against Cancer (UICC). Geneva: Switzerland. www.deathsfromsmoking.net. Accessed 20 Sep 2011.www.deathsfromsmoking.net

  • Rockville, M. D. (1989). Reducing the health consequences of smoking: 25 years of progress. A report of the Surgeon General. Rockville: US Department of Health and Human Services USDHHS, Public Health Service, Centers for Disease Control, Office on Smoking and Health.

    Google Scholar 

  • Segel, J. E. (2006). Cost-of-illness studies – A primer. RTI-UNC Center of Excellence in Health Promotion Economics. http://www.rti.org/pubs/coi_primer.pdf. Accessed 12 Sep 2011.

  • Shultz, J. M., Novotny, T. E., & Rice, D. P. (1991). Quantifying the disease impact of cigarette smoking with SAMMEC II software. Public Health Reports, 106, 326–333.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tranmer, J. E., Guerriere, D. N., Ungar, W. J., & Coyte, P. C. (2005). Valuing patient and caregiver time: A review of the literature. Pharmacoeconomics, 23, 449–459.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, S. P., Wen, C. P., Hu, S. C., Cheng, T. Y., & Huang, S. J. (2005). Workplace smoking related absenteeism and productivity costs in Taiwan. Tobacco Control, 14(Suppl 1), 33–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welte, R., Koenig, H., & Leidl, R. (2000). The costs of health damage and productivity losses attributable to cigarette smoking in Germany. European Journal of Public Health, 10, 31–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wendy, M., Rice, D. P., Sung, H. Y., & Michel, M. (2004). Valuing human life: Estimating the present value of lifetime earnings, 2000. San Francisco: Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education UC.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest in relation to this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joanna Lasocka .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendix

Appendix

The formula of smoking-attributable fraction (SAF) is as following (Bolin and Lindgren 2007; Schultz et al. 1991):

$$ SA{F}_{s}=\frac{{O}_{s}·\left({R}_{s}-1\right)}{\left({O}_{n}+{O}_{s}·{R}_{s}+{O}_{f}·{R}_{f}\right)} $$

and

$$ SA{F}_{f}=\frac{{O}_{f}·\left({R}_{f}-1\right)}{\left({O}_{n}+{O}_{s}·{R}_{s}+{O}_{f}·{R}_{f}\right)}$$

where:

  • O s percentage of smokers in the population,

  • O f percentage of former smokers in the population,

  • O n percentage of non-smokers in the population,

  • R s – relative risk of death in the population of smokers,

  • R f relative risk of death in the population of former smokers,

  • 1 – relative risk of death in the population of non-smokers,

  • SAF s SAF for smokers,

  • SAF f – SAF for former smokers.

The formula of present value of future earnings (PVFE) is as following (Wendy et al. 2004):

$$ PVF{E}_{y,g}={\displaystyle \sum _{n=y}^{59/64}{P}_{y,g}(n)\left[{Y}_{g}(n){E}_{g}(n)+{Y}_{g}^{h}(n){E}_{g}^{h}(n)\right]}{\left(1+p\right)}^{n-y}/{\left(1+r\right)}^{n-y} $$

where:

  • y – the current age of a person

  • g – gender

  • PVFE y,g – present discounted value of future earnings of a person of age y and gender g

  • P y,g (n) – probability that a person of age y and gender g will live to age n

  • Y g (n) – average annual salary of an employee of gender g and age n

  • E g (n) – percentage of the employed population of gender g and age n

  • \( {Y}_{g}^{h}(n)\)– average annual value of homemaking of a person of gender g and age n

  • \( {E}_{g}^{h}(n)\)– percentage of the homemaking population of gender g and age n

  • p – labor productivity growth (for both – the employed and the homemakers)

  • r – actual discount rate

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this paper

Cite this paper

Lasocka, J., Jakubczyk, M., Siekmeier, R. (2013). Costs of Smoking-Attributable Productivity Losses in Poland. In: Pokorski, M. (eds) Respiratory Regulation - Clinical Advances. Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, vol 755. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4546-9_23

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics