Prevalence and determinants of sunburn in Queensland

Issue addressed: Australia records the highest incidence of skin cancer in the world. In response to this public education campaigns have incorporated messages about reducing sun exposure and avoiding sunburn. This study sought to describe the prevalence of and factors associated with sunburn in Queensland residents. Methods: The Queensland Cancer Risk Study was a population-based, cross-sectional survey of 9,298 respondents conducted via computer-assisted telephone interview during 2004. Sunburn prevalence and its association with sociodemographics and skin cancer risk variables were examined. Results: More than two-thirds (70.4%) of respondents reported at least one episode of sunburn in the past 12 months, and one in ten respondents reported at least one episode of sever sunburn in the past 12 months. Experiences of sunburn on two or more occasions were reported more frequently by males than females (57.6% versus 46.5%, p < 0.001), and by nearly two-thirds (65.8%) of those aged 20-39 years compared to 48.0% of 40-59 year olds, and 26.7% of 60-75 year olds (p < 0.001). Episodes of sunburn were strongly associated with being male (OR=2.20 95%CI 1.84-2.63) and being aged 20 to 39 years compared to 60 to 75 years (OR=9.79, 95%CI=7.66-12.50). Conclusions: Sunburn remains highly prevalent among Queensland residents particularly among men and in the younger age groups. So what? More effective strategies and methods may be required to extend the influence of health promotion campaigns.

Cost-effectiveness of a telephone-delivered intervention for physical activity and diet

Background: Given escalating rates of chronic disease, broad-reach and cost-effective interventions to increase physical activity and improve dietary intake are needed. The cost-effectiveness of a Telephone Counselling intervention to improve physical activity and diet, targeting adults with established chronic diseases in a low socio-economic area of a major Australian city was examined. Methodology/Principal Findings: A cost-effectiveness modelling study using data collected between February 2005 and November 2007 from a cluster-randomised trial that compared Telephone Counselling with a “Usual Care” (brief intervention) alternative. Economic outcomes were assessed using a state-transition Markov model, which predicted the progress of participants through five health states relating to physical activity and dietary improvement, for ten years after recruitment. The costs and health benefits of Telephone Counselling, Usual Care and an existing practice (Real Control) group were compared. Telephone Counselling compared to Usual Care was not cost-effective ($78,489 per quality adjusted life year gained). However, the Usual Care group did not represent existing practice and is not a useful comparator for decision making. Comparing Telephone Counselling outcomes to existing practice (Real Control), the intervention was found to be cost-effective ($29,375 per quality adjusted life year gained). Usual Care (brief intervention) compared to existing practice (Real Control) was also cost-effective ($12,153 per quality adjusted life year gained). Conclusions/Significance: This modelling study shows that a decision to adopt a Telephone Counselling program over existing practice (Real Control) is likely to be cost-effective. Choosing the ‘Usual Care’ brief intervention over existing practice (Real Control) shows a lower cost per quality adjusted life year, but the lack of supporting evidence for efficacy or sustainability is an important consideration for decision makers. The economics of behavioural approaches to improving health must be made explicit if decision makers are to be convinced that allocating resources toward such programs is worthwhile.