Search

We compared the costs and cost-efficiency of two unconditional cash transfer (UCT) programs in southern Niger – a 'standard' four-month program implemented during the June-September lean season and a six-month 'modified' UCT implemented April-September – each providing the same total cash transfer. The standard UCT was more cost-efficient based on all metrics. However, costs to beneficiaries were unevenly distributed due to program design decisions about cash delivery mechanisms, which eroded the net transfer value for some beneficiaries more than others. Beyond this finding, we contribute to the advancement of costing studies through the descriptive detail and transparent reporting of our analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ObjectiveTo understand and compare the primary barriers households face when accessing treatment for cases of childhood severe acute malnutrition (SAM) in different cultural settings with different types of implementing agencies.DesignThe study presents a comparative qualitative analysis of two SAM treatment services, selected to include: (i) one programme implemented by a non-governmental organization and one by a Ministry of Health; and (ii) programmes considered to be successful, defined as either coverage level achieved or extent of integration within government infrastructure. Results from individual interviews and group discussions were recorded and analysed for themes in barriers to access.SettingSindh Province, Pakistan; Tigray Region, Ethiopia.SubjectsBeneficiary communities and staff of SAM treatment services in two countries.ResultsCommon barriers were related to distance, high opportunity costs, knowledge of services, knowledge of malnutrition and child’s refusal of ready-to-use foods. While community sensitization mechanisms were generally strong in these well-performing programmes, in remote areas with less programme exposure, beneficiaries experienced barriers to remaining in the programme until their children recovered.ConclusionsHouseholds experienced a number of barriers when accessing SAM treatment services. Integration of SAM treatment with other community-based interventions, as the UN recommends, can improve access to life-saving services. Efforts to integrate SAM treatment into national health systems should not neglect the community component of health systems and dedicated funding for the community component is needed to ensure access. Further research and policy efforts should investigate feasible mechanisms to effectively reduce barriers to access and ensure equitable service delivery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Chronic malnutrition is a serious problem in southern Angola with a prevalence of 49.9% and 37.2% in the provinces of Huila and Cunene, respectively. The MuCCUA (Mother and Child Chronic Undernutrition in Angola) trial is a community-based randomised controlled trial (c-RCT) which aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a nutrition supplementation plus standard of care intervention and a cash transfer plus standard of care intervention in preventing stunting, and to compare them with a standard of care alone intervention in southern Angola. This protocol describes the planned economic evaluation associated with the c-RCT., Methods and Analysis: We will conduct a cost-efficiency and cost-effectiveness analysis nested within the MuCCUA trial with a societal perspective, measuring programme, provider, participant and household costs. We will collect programme costs prospectively using a combined calculation method including quantitative and qualitative data. Financial costs will be estimated by applying activity-based costing methods to accounting records using time allocation sheets. We will estimate costs not included in accounting records by the ingredients approach, and indirect costs incurred by beneficiaries through interviews, household surveys and focus group discussions. Cost-efficiency will be estimated as cost per output achieved by combining activity-specific cost data with routine data on programme outputs. Cost-effectiveness will be assessed as cost per stunting case prevented. We will calculate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios comparing the additional cost per improved outcome of the different intervention arms and the standard of care. We will perform sensitivity analyses to assess robustness of results., Ethics and Dissemination: This economic evaluation will provide useful information to the Angolan Government and other policymakers on the most cost-effective intervention to prevent stunting in this and other comparable contexts. The protocol was approved by the República de Angola Ministério da Saúde Comité de Ética (27C.E/MINSA.INIS/2022). The findings of this study will be disseminated within academia and the wider policy sphere., Trial Registration Number: ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT05571280)., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)