Search

Transmission rate modeling estimated secondary infections from those aware and unaware of their HIV infection. An estimated 49% of transmissions were from the 20% of persons living with HIV unaware of their infection. About eight transmissions would be averted per 100 persons newly aware of their infection; with more infections averted the higher the percentage of persons with viral suppression who can be linked to care. Improving all stages of HIV care would substantially reduce transmission rates.

Objective: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness and potential impact of expanded female condom distribution., Design: Cost-effectiveness analysis assessing HIV infections averted annually and incremental cost per HIV infection averted for country-wide distribution of the nitrile female condom (FC2) among sexually active individuals, 15-49 years, with access to publicly distributed condoms in Brazil and South Africa., Results: In Brazil, expansion of FC2 distribution to 10% of current male condom use would avert an estimated 604 (5-95th percentiles, 412-831) HIV infections at 20,683 US dollars (5-95th percentiles, 13,497-29,521) per infection averted. In South Africa, 9577 (5-95th percentiles, 6539-13,270) infections could be averted, at 985 US dollars (5-95th percentiles, 633-1412) per infection averted. The estimated cost of treating one HIV-infected individual is 21,970 US dollars (5-95th percentiles, 18,369-25,719) in Brazil and 1503 US dollars (5-95th percentiles, 1245-1769) in South Africa, indicating potential cost savings. The incremental cost of expanded distribution would be reduced to 8930 US dollars (5-95th percentiles, 5864-13,163) per infection averted in Brazil and 374 US dollars (5-95th percentiles, 237-553) in South Africa by acquiring FC2s through a global purchasing mechanism and increasing distribution threefold. Sensitivity analyses show model estimates to be most sensitive to the estimated prevalence of sexually transmitted infections, total sexual activity, and fraction of FC2s properly used., Conclusions: Expanded distribution of FC2 in Brazil and South Africa could avert substantial numbers of HIV infections at little or no net cost to donor or government agencies. FC2 may be a useful and cost-effective supplement to the male condom for preventing HIV.

Objective: Studies of the effectiveness of HIV prevention interventions for persons living with HIV have examined interventions with very wide variation in intensity (from single session interventions to those offered twice-weekly for 6 months); this raises questions about cost-effectiveness. Herein the question is asked: at varied (but specified) levels of HIV transmission rates and intervention effectiveness, how much money can be spent per HIV-seropositive client on HIV prevention services and still be considered cost-saving to society (in the United States)?, Design and Methods: Standard methods of economic evaluation (threshold analysis, in particular) were used. Per-client HIV transmission rates and intervention effectiveness were specified and then allowed to vary widely. The threshold for intervention cost (as well as number of sessions per client) that could be justified on the basis of societal cost savings was then calculated., Results: If HIV transmissions are permanently prevented and lifetime medical costs are avoided in an HIV-seronegative partner, then monthly counseling sessions, even after high quality pre- and post-test counseling, and even at moderate levels of effectiveness, may be cost-saving to society (and at higher transmission rates and effectiveness, dozens of sessions per client could be cost-saving). If these interventions delay (but do not permanently prevent) HIV infection among HIV-seronegative partners, then the cost and number of session thresholds are substantially lower., Conclusions: Even with considerable uncertainty in input parameters, an economic evaluation threshold analysis framework can yield useful insights for guiding the selection of intensity of HIV prevention services for persons living with HIV.

Scenario and cost-effectiveness analyses were used to estimate the effectiveness and efficiency of HIV prevention activities in the USA (1978-2000). Under four conservative scenarios on the course of HIV epidemic that might have occurred had there been no prevention efforts. we estimate that prevention activities averted 204,000-1,585,000 infections at a cost of between 49,700 US dollars and 6400 US dollars per infection prevented (less than the medical costs of treating a case of HIV disease).

Cost-effectiveness information is needed to help public health decision makers choose between competing HIV prevention programs. One way to organize this information is in a 'league table' that lists cost-effectiveness ratios for different interventions and which facilitates comparisons across interventions. Herein we propose a common outcome measure for use in HIV prevention league tables and present a preliminary league table of interventions to reduce sexual transmission of HIV in the US. Fifteen studies encompassing 29 intervention for different population groups are included in the table. Approximately half of the interventions are cost-saving (i.e. save society money, in the long run), and three-quarters are cost-effective by conventional standards. We discuss the utility of such a table for informing the HIV prevention resource allocation process and delineate some of the difficulties associated with the league table approach, especially as applied to HIV prevention cost-effectiveness analysis.

The outcome measures employed in an HIV prevention intervention study should match the research and policy questions at hand. If the question is 'did the intervention work to prevent HIV infection?', then seroincidence data may be insufficient. However, if the question is 'why did the intervention work?', then more detailed behavioral data are necessary (and sometimes behavior change itself is the real goal of an intervention study). Given the wide range of questions asked by HIV prevention policy makers, funders and researchers, a spectrum of outcome measures is needed across HIV prevention intervention studies. These include measures of behavioral determinants, HIV-related risk behaviors, HIV incidence (and other biologic markers), morbidity, mortality, and cost-effectiveness factors (such as cost per quality-adjusted life year saved). In this paper, we review the range of outcome measures used and needed in these intervention studies. Particular attention is paid to the psychometric properties of self-reported behavior change measures of sexual behavior and substance use. Additional emphasis is placed on the role of cost-effectiveness measures in intervention studies. A general framework is proposed for conceptualizing the array of outcome measure possible for any given HIV prevention intervention study.

Objective: The goal of the multisite National AIDS Demonstration Research (NADR) program was to reduce the sexual and drug injection-related HIV risks of out-of-treatment injection drug users and their sex partners. Previous analyses have established that the NADR interventions were effective at changing participants' risky behaviors. This study was to determine whether the NADR program also was cost-effective., Methods: Data from eight NADR study sites were included in the analysis. A mathematical model was used to translate reported sexual and injection-related behavior changes into an estimate of the number of infections prevented by the NADR interventions and then to calculate the corresponding savings in averted HIV/AIDS medical care costs and quality-adjusted years of life, assuming United States values for these parameters. Because cost data were not collected in the original NADR evaluation, the savings in averted medical care costs were compared with the cost of implementing a similar intervention program for injection drug users., Results: The eight NADR interventions prevented approximately 129 infections among 6629 participants and their partners. Overall, the NADR program would be cost saving (i.e. provide net economic savings) if it cost less than US$2107 per person and would be cost-effective if it cost less than US$10,264 per person. Both of these estimates are considerably larger than the US$273 per person cost of the comparison intervention. There was substantial cross-site variability., Conclusions: The results of this analysis strongly suggest that the NADR interventions were cost-saving overall and were, at the very least, cost-effective at all eight sites. In the United States and other developed counties, investments in HIV-prevention interventions such as these have the potential to save substantial economic resources by averting HIV-related medical care expenses among injection drug users.

Objective: Counseling and testing and partner notification are effective HIV prevention strategies, but they can be resource intensive. This paper evaluates the cost-effectiveness of partner notification and counseling and testing offered in HIV and sexually transmitted disease (STD) clinics in preventing future HIV infections in the United States of America., Methods: Decision trees were developed from both societal and provider perspectives. The counseling and testing and partner notification models incorporate estimates of HIV prevalence, return rates for counseling, risk of HIV transmission within 1 year, and the effectiveness of counseling. Cost estimates for counseling and testing and partner notification programs and lifetime treatment cost of HIV for the United States of America were obtained from published literature. Extensive sensitivity analyses of model parameters were conducted., Results: For a cohort of 10,000 individuals at a clinic with an HIV seroprevalence of 1.5%, we estimate that counseling and testing prevents eight HIV infections and saves society almost $1,000,000. We estimate that partner notification for the 113 infected persons identified by counseling and testing, prevents another 1.2 HIV infections and saves an additional $181,000. To the provider (HIV and STD clinics), this translates to a cost of $32,000 per case prevented by counseling and testing and an additional $28,000 for partner notification. Model results are most sensitive to assumptions of HIV prevalence, risk of transmission, and treatment cost of HIV., Conclusions: Counseling and testing and partner notification are cost effective in preventing HIV transmission in this setting. This model can be adapted to assess the cost-effectiveness of counseling and testing and partner notification in other settings.

Objectives: To assess the cost-effectiveness, relative to other health-related interventions in the U.S., of post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) following potential HIV exposure through sexual contact with a partner who may or may not be infected, and to compare the relative cost-effectiveness of dual- and triple-combination PEP., Methods: Standard techniques of cost-utility analysis were used to assess the cost-effectiveness of PEP with a four-week regimen of zidovudine and lamivudine, or zidovudine, lamivudine, and indinavir. Due to a lack of empirical data on the effectiveness of PEP with combination drug regimens, the analysis assumed that combination PEP was no more effective than PEP with zidovudine alone. The main outcome variable is the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) saved by the program., Results: Providing PEP to a cohort of 10,000 patients who report receptive anal intercourse with a partner of unknown HIV status (who is assumed to be infected with probability equal to 0.18) would prevent about 20 infections, at an average net cost of about US$ 70,000 per infection averted. The cost-utility ratio, US$ 6316 per QALY saved, indicates that PEP is highly cost-effective in this instance. Moreover, triple-combination PEP would need to be about 9% more effective than dual-combination PEP for the addition of indinavir to the regimen to be considered cost-effective. Prophylaxis following receptive vaginal exposure is cost-effective only when it is nearly certain that the partner is infected; PEP for insertive anal and vaginal intercourse does not appear to be cost-effective., Conclusions: From a purely economic standpoint, PEP should be restricted to partners of infected persons (e.g., serodiscordant couples), to patients reporting unprotected receptive anal intercourse (including condom breakage), and possibly to cases where there is a substantial likelihood that the partner is infected. Providing PEP to all who request it does not appear to be an economically efficient use of limited HIV prevention and treatment resources.

Objective: A previous study empirically compared the effects of two HIV-prevention interventions for men who have sex with men: (i) a safer sex lecture, and (ii) the same lecture coupled with a 1.5 h skills-training group session. The skills-training intervention led to a significant increase in condom use at 12-month follow-up, compared with the lecture-only condition. The current study retrospectively assesses the incremental cost-effectiveness of skills training to determine whether it is worth the extra cost to add this component to an HIV-prevention intervention that would otherwise consist of a safer sex lecture only., Design: Standard techniques of incremental cost-utility analysis were employed., Methods: A societal perspective and a 5% discount rate were used. Cost categories assessed included: staff salary, fringe benefits, quality assurance, session materials, client transportation, client time valuation, and costs shared with other programs. A Bernoulli-process model of HIV transmission was used to estimate the number of HIV infections averted by the skills-training intervention component. For each infection averted, the discounted medical costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) saved were estimated. One- and multi-way sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of base-case results to changes in modeling assumptions., Results: Under base-case assumptions, the incremental cost of the skills training was less than $13,000 (or about $40 per person). The discounted medical costs averted by incrementally preventing HIV infections were over $170,000; more than 21 discounted QALY were saved. The cost per QALY saved was negative, indicating cost-savings. These results are robust to changes in most modeling assumptions. However, the model is moderately sensitive to changes in the per-contact risk of HIV transmission., Conclusions: Under most reasonable assumptions, the incremental costs of the skills training were outweighed by the medical costs saved. Thus, not only is skills training effective in reducing risky behavior, it is also cost-saving.