Search

Background: Drug resistant-tuberculosis is a growing burden on the South African health care budget. In response the National Department of Health implemented two important strategies in 2011; universal access to drug-sensitivity testing for rifampicin with Xpert MTB/RIF as the first-line diagnostic test for TB; and decentralization of treatment for RR/MDR-TB to improve access and reduce costs of treatment. Objective: Estimate the costs by treatment outcome of decentralized care for rifampicin and multi-drug resistant tuberculosis under routine conditions. The study was set at an outpatient drug resistant-tuberculosis treatment facility at a public academic hospital in Johannesburg, South Africa. During the study period 18–24 month long course treatment was offered for rifampicin-resistant and multi-drug-resistant tuberculosis. Methods: Data are from a prospective observational cohort study. Costs of treatment were estimated from the provider perspective using bottom-up micro-costing. Costs were estimated as patient-level resource use multiplied by the unit cost of the resource. Clinic visits, drugs, laboratory tests, and total days hospitalized were collected from patients' medical records. Staff time was estimated through a time and motion study. A successful treatment outcome was defined as cure or completion of the regimen. Results: We enrolled 124 patients with 52% having a successful outcome. The average total cost/patient for all patients was $3,430 and $4,530 for successfully treated patients. The largest contributors to total cost across all outcomes were drugs (43%) and staff (28%). The average cost to achieve a successful outcome including all patients who started treatment ("production cost") in the cohort is $6,684. Conclusions: Decentralized, outpatient RR/MDR-TB care under South Africa's 2011 strategy costs 74% less per patient than the previous strategy of inpatient care. The treatment cost of RR/MDR-TB is primarily driven by drug and staff costs, which are in turn dependant on treatment length. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In 2016, for the very first time, the Ministry of Health in Zambia implemented a reactive outbreak response to control the spread of cholera and vaccinated at-risk populations with a single dose of Shancol—an oral cholera vaccine (OCV). This study aimed to assess the costs of cholera illness and determine the cost-effectiveness of the 2016 vaccination campaign. Methodology: From April to June 2017, we conducted a retrospective cost and cost-effectiveness analysis in three peri-urban areas of Lusaka. To estimate costs of illness from a household perspective, a systematic random sample of 189 in-patients confirmed with V. cholera were identified from Cholera Treatment Centre registers and interviewed for out-of-pocket costs. Vaccine delivery and health systems costs were extracted from financial records at the District Health Office and health facilities. The cost of cholera treatment was derived by multiplying the subsidized cost of drugs by the quantity administered to patients during hospitalisation. The cost-effectiveness analysis measured incremental cost-effectiveness ratio—cost per case averted, cost per life saved and cost per DALY averted—for a single dose OCV. Results: The mean cost per administered vaccine was US$1.72. Treatment costs per hospitalized episode were US$14.49–US$18.03 for patients ≤15 years old and US$17.66–US$35.16 for older patients. Whereas households incurred costs on non-medical items such as communication, beverages, food and transport during illness, a large proportion of medical costs were borne by the health system. Assuming vaccine effectiveness of 88.9% and 63%, a life expectancy of 62 years and Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita of US$1,500, the costs per case averted were estimated US$369–US$532. Costs per life year saved ranged from US$18,515–US$27,976. The total cost per DALY averted was estimated between US$698–US$1,006 for patients ≤15 years old and US$666–US$1,000 for older patients. Conclusion: Our study determined that reactive vaccination campaign with a single dose of Shancol for cholera control in densely populated areas of Lusaka was cost-effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Providing HIV testing at health facilities remains the most common approach to ensuring access to HIV treatment and prevention services for the millions of undiagnosed HIV-infected individuals in sub-Saharan Africa. We sought to explore the costs of providing these services across three southern African countries with high HIV burden. Methods: Primary costing studies were undertaken in 54 health facilities providing HIV testing services (HTS) in Malawi, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Routinely collected monitoring and evaluation data for the health facilities were extracted to estimate the costs per individual tested and costs per HIV-positive individual identified. Costs are presented in 2016 US dollars. Sensitivity analysis explored key drivers of costs. Results: Health facilities were testing on average 2290 individuals annually, albeit with wide variations. The mean cost per individual tested was US$5.03.9 in Malawi, US$4.24 in Zambia and US$8.79 in Zimbabwe. The mean cost per HIV-positive individual identified was US$79.58, US$73.63 and US$178.92 in Malawi, Zambia and Zimbabwe respectively. Both cost estimates were sensitive to scale of testing, facility staffing levels and the costs of HIV test kits. Conclusions: Health facility based HIV testing remains an essential service to meet HIV universal access goals. The low costs and potential for economies of scale suggests an opportunity for further scale-up. However low uptake in many settings suggests that demand creation or alternative testing models may be needed to achieve economies of scale and reach populations less willing to attend facility based services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Human papillomavirus (HPV) has proven to be the cause of several severe clinical conditions on the cervix, vulva, vagina, anus, oropharynx and penis. Several studies have assessed the costs of cervical lesions, cervical cancer (CC), and genital warts. However, few have been done in Africa and none in Swaziland. Cost analysis is critical in providing useful information for economic evaluations to guide policymakers concerned with the allocation of resources in order to reduce the disease burden. Materials and methods: A prevalence-based cost of illness (COI) methodology was used to investigate the economic burden of HPV-related diseases. We used a top-down approach for the cost associated with hospital care and a bottom-up approach to estimate the cost associated with outpatient and primary care. The current study was conducted from a provider perspective since the state bears the majority of the costs of screening and treatment in Swaziland. All identifiable direct medical costs were considered for cervical lesions, cervical cancer and genital warts, which were primary diagnoses during 2015. A mix of bottom up micro-costing ingredients approach and top-down approaches was used to collect data on costs. All costs were computed at the price level of 2015 and converted to dollars ($). Results: The total annual estimated direct medical cost associated with screening, managing and treating cervical lesions, CC and genital warts in Swaziland was $16 million. The largest cost in the analysis was estimated for treatment of high-grade cervical lesions and cervical cancer representing 80% of the total cost ($12.6 million). Costs for screening only represented 5% of the total cost ($0.9 million). Treatment of genital warts represented 6% of the total cost ($1million). Conclusion: According to the cost estimations in this study, the economic burden of HPV-related cervical diseases and genital warts represents a major public health issue in Swaziland. Prevention of HPV infection with a national HPV immunization programme for pre-adolescent girls would prevent the majority of CC related deaths and associated costs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Caesarean section (CS) rates continue to evoke worldwide concern because of their steady increase, lack of consensus on the appropriate CS rate and the associated additional short- and long-term risks and costs. We present the latest CS rates and trends over the last 24 years. Methods: We collected nationally-representative data on CS rates between 1990 to 2014 and calculated regional and subregional weighted averages. We conducted a longitudinal analysis calculating differences in CS rates as absolute change and as the average annual rate of increase (AARI). Results: According to the latest data from 150 countries, currently 18.6% of all births occur by CS, ranging from 6% to 27.2% in the least and most developed regions, respectively. Latin America and the Caribbean region has the highest CS rates (40.5%), followed by Northern America (32.3%), Oceania (31.1%), Europe (25%), Asia (19.2%) and Africa (7.3%). Based on the data from 121 countries, the trend analysis showed that between 1990 and 2014, the global average CS rate increased 12.4% (from 6.7% to 19.1%) with an average annual rate of increase of 4.4%. The largest absolute increases occurred in Latin America and the Caribbean (19.4%, from 22.8% to 42.2%), followed by Asia (15.1%, from 4.4% to 19.5%), Oceania (14.1%, from 18.5% to 32.6%), Europe (13.8%, from 11.2% to 25%), Northern America (10%, from 22.3% to 32.3%) and Africa (4.5%, from 2.9% to 7.4%). Asia and Northern America were the regions with the highest and lowest average annual rate of increase (6.4% and 1.6%, respectively). Conclusion: The use of CS worldwide has increased to unprecedented levels although the gap between higher- and lower-resource settings remains. The information presented is essential to inform policy and global and regional strategies aimed at optimizing the use of CS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There is increasing evidence that mobile phone health interventions (“mHealth”) can improve health behaviors and outcomes and are critically important in low-resource, low-access settings. However, the majority of mHealth programs in developing countries fail to reach scale. One reason may be the challenge of developing financially sustainable programs. The goal of this paper is to explore strategies for mHealth program sustainability and develop cost-recovery models for program implementers using 2014 operational program data from Mobile for Reproductive Health (m4RH), a national text-message (SMS) based health communication service in Tanzania. Methods: We delineated 2014 m4RH program costs and considered three strategies for cost-recovery for the m4RH program: user pay-for-service, SMS cost reduction, and strategic partnerships. These inputs were used to develop four different cost-recovery scenarios. The four scenarios leveraged strategic partnerships to reduce per-SMS program costs and create per-SMS program revenue and varied the structure for user financial contribution. Finally, we conducted break-even and uncertainty analyses to evaluate the costs and revenues of these models at the 2014 user volume (125,320) and at any possible break-even volume. Results: In three of four scenarios, costs exceeded revenue by $94,596, $34,443, and $84,571 at the 2014 user volume. However, these costs represented large reductions (54%, 83%, and 58%, respectively) from the 2014 program cost of $203,475. Scenario four, in which the lowest per-SMS rate ($0.01 per SMS) was negotiated and users paid for all m4RH SMS sent or received, achieved a $5,660 profit at the 2014 user volume. A Monte Carlo uncertainty analysis demonstrated that break-even points were driven by user volume rather than variations in program costs. Conclusions: These results reveal that breaking even was only probable when all SMS costs were transferred to users and the lowest per-SMS cost was negotiated with telecom partners. While this strategy was sustainable for the implementer, a central concern is that health information may not reach those who are too poor to pay, limiting the program’s reach and impact. Incorporating strategies presented here may make mHealth programs more appealing to funders and investors but need further consideration to balance sustainability, scale, and impact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]