Is minimum unit pricing for alcohol having the intended effects on alcohol consumption in Scotland?

Abstract Background and aims Alcohol use is a major contributor to injuries, mortality and the burden of disease. This review updates knowledge on risk relations between dimensions of alcohol use and health outcomes to be used in global and national Comparative Risk Assessments (CRAs). Methods Systematic review of reviews and meta‐analyses on alcohol consumption and health outcomes attributable to alcohol use. For dimensions of exposure: volume of alcohol use, blood alcohol concentration and patterns of drinking, in particular heavy drinking occasions were studied. For liver cirrhosis, quality of alcohol was additionally considered. For all outcomes (mortality and/or morbidity): cause of death and disease/injury categories based on International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes used in global CRAs; harm to others. Results In total, 255 reviews and meta‐analyses were identified. Alcohol use was found to be linked causally to many disease and injury categories, with more than 40 ICD‐10 three‐digit categories being fully attributable to alcohol. Most partially attributable disease categories showed monotonic relationships with volume of alcohol use: the more alcohol consumed, the higher the risk of disease or death. Exceptions were ischaemic diseases and diabetes, with curvilinear relationships, and with beneficial effects of light to moderate drinking in people without heavy irregular drinking occasions. Biological pathways suggest an impact of heavy drinking occasions on additional diseases; however, the lack of medical epidemiological studies measuring this dimension of alcohol use precluded an in‐depth analysis. For injuries, except suicide, blood alcohol concentration was the most important dimension of alcohol use. Alcohol use caused marked harm to others, which has not yet been researched sufficiently. Conclusions Research since 2010 confirms the importance of alcohol use as a risk factor for disease and injuries; for some health outcomes, more than one dimension of use needs to be considered. Epidemiological studies should include measurement of heavy drinking occasions in line with biological knowledge.

Intervention strategies are available for reducing the high global burden of hazardous alcohol use as a risk factor for disease, but little is known about their potential costs and effects at a population level. This study set out to estimate these costs and effects. Analyses were carried out for 12 epidemiological World Health Organization subregions of the world. A population model was used to estimate the impact of evidence-based personal and nonpersonal interventions--including brief physician advice, taxation, roadside random breath testing, restricted sales access and advertising bans. Costs were measured in international dollars (I$); population-level intervention effects were gauged in terms of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted. Average and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (CERs) were computed. The most costly interventions to implement are brief advice in primary care and roadside breath testing of drivers. In populations with a high prevalence of heavy drinkers (more than 5%, such as Europe and North America), the most effective and cost-effective intervention was taxation (more than 500 DALYs averted per 1 million population; CER < I$500 per DALY averted). In populations with a lower prevalence of heavy drinking, however, taxation is estimated to be less cost effective overall than other, more targeted strategies, such as brief physician advice, roadside breath testing and advertising bans. The most efficient public health response to the burden of alcohol use depends on the prevalence of hazardous alcohol use, which is related to overall per capita consumption. Population-wide measures, such as taxation, are expected to represent the most cost-effective response in populations with moderate or high levels of drinking, whereas more targeted strategies are indicated in populations with lower rates of hazardous alcohol use.

We conducted a systematic review of studies examining relationships between measures of beverage alcohol tax or price levels and alcohol sales or self-reported drinking. A total of 112 studies of alcohol tax or price effects were found, containing 1003 estimates of the tax/price-consumption relationship. Studies included analyses of alternative outcome measures, varying subgroups of the population, several statistical models, and using different units of analysis. Multiple estimates were coded from each study, along with numerous study characteristics. Using reported estimates, standard errors, t-ratios, sample sizes and other statistics, we calculated the partial correlation for the relationship between alcohol price or tax and sales or drinking measures for each major model or subgroup reported within each study. Random-effects models were used to combine studies for inverse variance weighted overall estimates of the magnitude and significance of the relationship between alcohol tax/price and drinking. Simple means of reported elasticities are -0.46 for beer, -0.69 for wine and -0.80 for spirits. Meta-analytical results document the highly significant relationships (P < 0.001) between alcohol tax or price measures and indices of sales or consumption of alcohol (aggregate-level r = -0.17 for beer, -0.30 for wine, -0.29 for spirits and -0.44 for total alcohol). Price/tax also affects heavy drinking significantly (mean reported elasticity = -0.28, individual-level r = -0.01, P < 0.01), but the magnitude of effect is smaller than effects on overall drinking. A large literature establishes that beverage alcohol prices and taxes are related inversely to drinking. Effects are large compared to other prevention policies and programs. Public policies that raise prices of alcohol are an effective means to reduce drinking.