Search

ObjectiveTo analyse and compare the cost-effectiveness of different interventions to reduce salt consumption.DesignA systematic review of published cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) and cost-utility analyses (CUA) was undertaken in the databases EMBASE, MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane and others until July 2016. Study selection was limited to CEA and CUA conducted in member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in English, German or French, without time limit. Outcomes measures were life years gained (LYG), disability-adjusted life years (DALY) and quality-adjusted life years (QALY). Relevant aspects in modelling were analysed and compared. Quality assessments were conducted using the Drummond and Jefferson/British Medical Journalchecklist.SettingOECD member countries.SubjectsMainly adults.ResultsFourteen CEA and CUA were included in the review which analysed different strategies: salt reduction or substitution in processed foods, taxes, labelling, awareness campaigns and targeted dietary advice. Fifty-nine out of sixty-two scenarios were cost-saving. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in international dollars (Intl.$; 2015) was particularly low for taxes, a salt reduction by food manufacturers and labelling (303 900 Intl.$/DALY). However, only six studies analysed cost-effectiveness from a societal perspective and quality assessments showed flaws in conducting and a lack of transparency in reporting.ConclusionsA population-wide salt reduction could be cost-effective in prevention of hypertension and CVD in OECD member countries. However, comparability between study results is limited due to differences in modelling, applied perspectives and considered data.