The Milbank Memorial Fund is an endowed operating foundation that publishes The Milbank Quarterly, commissions projects, and convenes state health policy decision makers on issues they identify as important to population health.
We focus on a number of topic areas identified by state health policy leaders as important to population health.
The Center for Evidence-based Policy at Oregon Health & Science University is a national leader in evidence-based decision making and policy design.
Keep up with news and updates from the Milbank Memorial Fund. Get the latest from thought leaders, including Christopher F. Koller, president of the Fund.
We publish The Milbank Quarterly, as well as reports, issues briefs, and case studies on topics important to population health.
December 2008 (Volume 86)
December 2008 | Sarah E. Gollust, Steven A. Schroeder, Kenneth E. Warner
Context: Counseling smokers to quit smoking and providing them with pharmaceutical cessation aides are among the most beneficial and cost-effective interventions that clinicians can offer patients. Yet assistance with quitting is not universally covered by health plans or offered by all clinicians. Analysis of stakeholders’ perspectives and interests can identify the barriers to more widespread provision of cessation services and suggest strategies for the public policy agenda to advance smoking cessation.
Methods: Review of literature and discussions with representatives of stakeholders.
Findings: All stakeholders-health plans, employers, clinicians, smokers, and the government-face barriers to broader smoking cessation activities. These range from health plans’ perceiving that covering counseling and pharmacotherapy will increase costs without producing commensurate health care savings, to clinicians’ feeling unprepared and uncompensated for counseling. Like other preventive measures aimed at behavior, efforts directed at smoking cessation have marginal status among health care interventions. State governments can help correct this status by increasing Medicaid coverage of treatment and expanding coverage for state employees. The federal government can promote the adoption of six initiatives recommended by a government subcommittee on cessation: set up a national quit line, develop a media campaign to encourage cessation, include cessation benefits in all federally funded insurance plans, create a research infrastructure to improve cessation rates, develop a clinician training agenda, and create a fund to increase cessation activities through a new $2 per pack cigarette excise tax. Both the federal and state governments can increase cessation by adopting policies such as the higher cigarette tax and laws prohibiting smoking in workplaces and public places.
Conclusions: Public policy efforts should assume greater social responsibility for smoking cessation, including more aggressive leadership at the state and federal levels, as well as through advocacy, public health, and clinician organizations.
Author(s): Sarah E. Gollust; Steven A. Schroeder; Kenneth E. Warner
Keywords: smoking; cessation; insurance coverage; policy
Read on Wiley Online Library
Read on JSTOR
Volume 86, Issue 4 (pages 601–627)
Published in 2008
Waste in the U.S. Health Care System: A Conceptual Framework
Revisiting Rose: Comparing the Benefits and Costs of Population-Wide and Targeted Interventions