The demand for medical male circumcision
IFPRI3; C.3 Labor Markets; CRP2; C Improving markets and trade ; MTID; PIM ; PR ; CGIAR Research Program on Policies, Institutions, and Markets (PIM)
5 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
IFPRI3; C.3 Labor Markets; CRP2; C Improving markets and trade ; MTID; PIM ; PR ; CGIAR Research Program on Policies, Institutions, and Markets (PIM)
BASE
In: African population studies: Etude de la Population Africaine, Band 25, Heft 2
In: Bulletin of the World Health Organization: the international journal of public health = Bulletin de l'Organisation Mondiale de la Santé, Band 95, Heft 7, S. 491-502
ISSN: 1564-0604
In: HPOPEN-D-21-00135
SSRN
In: Journal of global health economics and policy, Band 2
ISSN: 2806-6073
Background Timely diagnosis of HIV in infants and children is an urgent priority. In Malawi, 40,000 infants annually are HIV exposed. However, gold standard polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR) based testing requires centralised laboratories, causing turn-around times (TAT) of 2 to 3 months and significant loss to follow-up. If feasible and acceptable, minimising diagnostic delays through HIV Point-of-care-testing (POCT) may be cost-effective. We assessed whether POCT Cepheid Xpert HIV-1 Qual assay whole blood (XpertHIV) was more cost-effective than PCR. Methods From July-August 2018, 700 PCR Abbott tests using dried blood spots (DBS) were performed on 680 participants who enrolled on the feasibility, acceptability and performance of the XpertHIV study. Newly identified HIV-positive DBS from the 680 participants were retested, so with confirmatory testing of the HIV-positive cases, 700 tests were performed. We conducted a cost-minimisation and cost-effectiveness analysis of XpertHIV against PCR, as the standard of care. A random sample of 200 caregivers from the 680 participants had semi-structured interviews to explore costs from a societal perspective of XpertHIV at Mulanje District Hospital, Malawi. Analysis used TAT as the primary outcome measure. Results were extrapolated from the study period (29 days) to a year (240 working days). Sensitivity analyses characterised individual and joint parameter uncertainty and estimated patient cost per test. Results During the study period, XpertHIV was cost-minimising at $42.34 per test compared to $66.66 for PCR. Over a year, XpertHIV remained cost-minimising at $16.12 compared to PCR at $27.06. From the patient perspective (travel, food, lost productivity), the cost per test of XpertHIV was $2.45. XpertHIV had a mean TAT of 7.10 hours compared to 153.15 hours for PCR. Extrapolates accounting for equipment costs, lab consumables and losses to follow up estimated annual savings of $2,193,538.88 if XpertHIV is used nationally, as opposed to PCR. Conclusions This preliminary evidence suggests that adopting POCT XpertHIV will save time, allowing HIV-exposed infants to receive prompt care and may improve outcomes. The Malawi government will pay less due to XpertHIV's cost savings and associated benefits.