Project description:Evidence on determinants of vaccine delivery costs can inform program design and planning. Given the dearth of this evidence for human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, we conducted an analysis to identify programmatic and operational factors that are statistically associated with variations in economic costs for HPV vaccine delivery, within and across six low- and middle-income countries. HPV vaccine program operations and cost data were collected from Ethiopia, Guyana, Rwanda, Senegal, Sri Lanka, and Uganda. An ordinary least square regression analysis was done using data from 279 health facilities in these six countries. We ran country-specific and pooled multivariate linear regressions. A conditional regression including 228 facilities was also run. The dependent variable was the estimated total economic costs for HPV vaccine delivery per facility, excluding vaccine procurement costs. Explanatory variables included number of HPV vaccine doses delivered; numbers of vaccination sessions conducted, and schools served; distance traveled by health workers for vaccine delivery; intensity of conducting program activities; human resource (health workers, school staff, etc.) utilization rates; and categorical variables indicating whether per diems were paid, and for country-specific dummies; Explanatory variables such as the number of program activities or meetings held, receipt of per diems, and utilization rates of health workers, were all positively and statistically significantly associated with economic costs in the pooled sample, for both the unconditional and conditional regressions. Variables such as the doses delivered, and number of sessions conducted were statistically significant in the unconditional regression. The within-country regression found that only variations in utilization rates of health workers were statistically significant in all countries. Our analysis provides evidence to HPV vaccination program stakeholders on which program context variables impact costs, which can inform program adjustment to improve cost efficiency, especially as programs managers work to revitalize and rebuild HPV vaccine coverage after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Project description:IntroductionThere are concerns from immunization program planners about high delivery costs for human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine. Most prior research evaluated costs of HPV vaccine delivery during demonstration projects or at introduction, showing relatively high costs, which may not reflect the costs beyond the pilot or introduction years. This study sought to understand the operational context and estimate delivery costs for HPV vaccine in six national programs, beyond their introduction years.MethodsOperational research and microcosting methods were used to retrospectively collect primary data on HPV vaccination program activities in Ethiopia, Guyana, Rwanda, Senegal, Sri Lanka, and Uganda. Data were collected from the national level and a sample of subnational administrative offices and health facilities. Operational data collected were tabulated as percentages and frequencies. Financial costs (monetary outlays) and economic costs (financial plus opportunity costs) were estimated, as was the cost per HPV vaccine dose delivered. Costing was done from the health system perspective and reported in 2019 United States dollars (US$).ResultsAcross the study countries, between 53 % and 99 % of HPV vaccination sessions were conducted in schools. Differences were observed in intensity and frequency with which program activities were conducted and resources used. Mean annual economic costs at health facilities in each country ranged from $1,207 to $3,190, while at the national level these ranged from $7,657 to $304,278. Mean annual HPV vaccine doses delivered per health facility in each country ranged from 162 to 761. Mean financial costs per dose per study country ranged from $0.27 to $3.32, while the economic cost per dose ranged from $3.09 to $17.20.ConclusionHPV vaccine delivery costs were lower than at introduction in some study countries. There were differences in the activities carried out for HPV vaccine delivery and the number of doses delivered, impacting the cost estimates.

Project description:IntroductionInfertility, a condition of the reproductive system, affects millions of individuals and couples worldwide. Despite infertility treatment's existence, it is largely unavailable and inaccessible in low/middle-income countries (LMICs) due to the prohibitive costs compounded by an absence of financing. Previous systematic reviews have shown that there is scanty information in LMICs on out-of-pocket (OOP) payments for infertility treatment. This protocol outlines the methodological approach and analytical process to appraise the extent of economic burden due to payments for infertility care services in LMICs.Method and analysisUsing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses approach, we will primarily search for articles indexed in PubMed, Web of Science, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, EconLit and PsycINFO databases. Grey literature from relevant organisations' virtual libraries shall also be searched. Backward and forward searches on the articles selected will also be done. Quantitative studies on infertility treatment costs from LMICs across the world regions within the last 20 years will be considered. The primary outcome of interest shall include OOP payments, catastrophic health expenditure and direct costs for infertility services. Conversely, informal payments and indirect costs related to infertility treatments shall be considered as secondary outcomes. Integrated quality Criteria for Review Of Multiple Study designs will be used to assess the quality of the studies included in the review. Meta-analysis shall be considered if sufficient studies identified are homogenous in characteristics. Also, the review shall analyse the average cost of infertility treatment against the respective countries' economic indicators like gross domestic product per capita if data permit.Ethics and disseminationResearch and ethics approval will not be required given this will be a review of published articles on the subject. The findings shall be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presentation to the WHO and its partners.Prospero registration numberCRD42020199312.

Project description:As antiretroviral treatment (ART) for HIV/AIDS is scaled up globally, information on per-person costs is critical to improve efficiency in service delivery and to maximize coverage and health impact. The objective of this study was to review studies on unit costs for delivery of adult and paediatric ART per patient-year, and prevention of mother-to-child transmission (PMTCT) interventions per mother-infant pair screened or treated, in low- and middle-income countries. A systematic review was conducted of English, French and Spanish publications from 2001 to 2009, reporting empirical costing that accounted for at least antiretroviral (ARV) medicines, laboratory testing and personnel. Expenditures were analysed by country-income level and cost component. All costs were standardized to $US, year 2009 values. Several sensitivity analyses were conducted. Analyses covered 29 eligible, comprehensive, costing studies. In the base case, in low-income countries (LIC), median ART cost per patient-year was $US792 (mean: 839, range: 682-1089); for lower-middle-income countries (LMIC), the median was $US932 (mean: 1246, range: 156-3904); and, for upper-middle-income countries (UMIC), the median was $US1454 (mean: 2783, range: 1230-5667). ARV drugs were the largest component of overall ART costs in all settings (64%, 50% and 47% in LIC, LMIC and UMIC, respectively). Of 26 ART studies, 14 reported the drug regimes used, and only one study explicitly reported second-line treatment costs. The second cost driver was laboratory cost in LIC and LMIC (14% and 20%), and personnel costs in UMIC (26%). Two ART studies specified the types of laboratory tests costed, and three studies specifically included above facility-level personnel costs. Three studies reported detailed PMTCT costs, and three studies reported on paediatric ART. There is a paucity of data on the full unit costs for delivery of ART and PMTCT, particularly for LIC and middle-income countries. Heterogeneity in activities costed, and insufficient detail regarding components included in the costing, hampers standardization of unit cost measures. Evaluation of programme-level unit costs would benefit from international guidance on standardized costing methods, and expenditure categories and definitions. Future work should help elucidate the sources of the large variations in delivery unit costs across settings with similar income and epidemiological characteristics.

Project description:IntroductionInformation on immunization delivery costs (IDCs) is essential for better planning and budgeting for the sustainability and performance of national programs. However, delivery cost evidence is fragmented and of variable quality, making it difficult for policymakers, planners, and other stakeholders to understand and use. This study aimed to consolidate and summarize the evidence on delivery costs, answering the question: What are the unit costs of vaccine delivery across low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and through a variety of delivery strategies?MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of over 15,000 published and unpublished resources from 2005 to 2018 that included IDCs in LMICs. We quality-rated and extracted data from 61 resources that contained 410 immunization delivery unit costs (e.g., cost per dose, cost per fully immunized child). We converted cost findings to a common year (2016) and currency (U.S. dollars) to ensure comparability across studies and settings. We performed a descriptive and gap analysis and developed immunization delivery cost ranges using comparable unit costs for single vaccines and schedules of vaccines.ResultsThe majority of IDC evidence comes from low-income countries and Sub-Saharan Africa. Most unit costs are presented as cost per dose and represent health facility-based delivery.DiscussionThe cost ranges may be higher than current estimates used in many LMICs for budgeting: $0.16-$2.54 incremental cost per dose (including economic, financial, and fiscal costs) for single, newly introduced vaccines, and $0.75-$9.45 full cost per dose (economic costs) for schedules of four to eight vaccines delivered to children under one.ConclusionsDespite increased attention on improving coverage and strengthening immunization delivery, evidence on the cost of delivery is nascent but growing. The cost ranges can inform planning and policymaking, but should be used with caution given their width and the few unit costs used in their development.

Project description:IntroductionSince 2007, HPV vaccine has been available to low and middle income countries (LAMIC) for small-scale 'demonstration projects', or national programmes. We analysed coverage achieved in HPV vaccine demonstration projects and national programmes that had completed at least 6 months of implementation between January 2007-2016.MethodsA mapping exercise identified 45 LAMICs with HPV vaccine delivery experience. Estimates of coverage and factors influencing coverage were obtained from 56 key informant interviews, a systematic published literature search of 5 databases that identified 61 relevant full texts and 188 solicited unpublished documents, including coverage surveys. Coverage achievements were analysed descriptively against country or project/programme characteristics. Heterogeneity in data, funder requirements, and project/programme design precluded multivariate analysis.ResultsEstimates of uptake, schedule completion rates and/or final dose coverage were available from 41 of 45 LAMICs included in the study. Only 17 estimates from 13 countries were from coverage surveys, most were administrative data. Final dose coverage estimates were all over 50% with most between 70% and 90%, and showed no trend over time. The majority of delivery strategies included schools as a vaccination venue. In countries with school enrolment rates below 90%, inclusion of strategies to reach out-of-school girls contributed to obtaining high coverage compared to school-only strategies. There was no correlation between final dose coverage and estimated recurrent financial costs of delivery from cost analyses. Coverage achieved during joint delivery of HPV vaccine combined with another intervention was variable with little/no evaluation of the correlates of success.ConclusionsThis is the most comprehensive descriptive analysis of HPV vaccine coverage in LAMICs to date. It is possible to deliver HPV vaccine with excellent coverage in LAMICs. Further good quality data are needed from health facility based delivery strategies and national programmes to aid policymakers to effectively and sustainably scale-up HPV vaccination.

Project description:Study questionWhat are the direct costs of assisted reproductive technology (ART), and how affordable is it for patients in low- and middle-income countries (LMICS)?Summary answerDirect medical costs paid by patients for infertility treatment are significantly higher than annual average income and GDP per capita, pointing to unaffordability and the risk of catastrophic expenditure for those in need.What is known alreadyInfertility treatment is largely inaccessible to many people in LMICs. Our analysis shows that no study in LMICs has previously compared ART medical costs across countries in international dollar terms (US$PPP) or correlated the medical costs with economic indicators, financing mechanisms, and policy regulations. Previous systematic reviews on costs have been limited to high-income countries while those in LMICs have only focussed on descriptive analyses of these costs.Study design size durationGuided by the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA), we searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, EconLit, PsycINFO, Latin American & Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, and grey literature for studies published in all languages from LMICs between 2001 and 2020.Participants/materials setting methodsThe primary outcome of interest was direct medical costs paid by patients for one ART cycle. To gauge ART affordability, direct medical costs were correlated with the GDP per capita or average income of respective countries. ART regulations and public financing mechanisms were analyzed to provide information on the healthcare contexts in the countries. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Integrated Quality Criteria for Review of Multiple Study designs.Main results and the role of chanceOf the 4062 studies identified, 26 studies from 17 countries met the inclusion criteria. There were wide disparities across countries in the direct medical costs paid by patients for ART ranging from USD2109 to USD18 592. Relative ART costs and GDP per capita showed a negative correlation, with the costs in Africa and South-East Asia being on average up to 200% of the GDP per capita. Lower relative costs in the Americas and the Eastern Mediterranean regions were associated with the presence of ART regulations and government financing mechanisms.Limitations reasons for cautionSeveral included studies were not primarily designed to examine the cost of ART and thus lacked comprehensive details of the costs. However, a sensitivity analysis showed that exclusion of studies with below the minimum quality score did not change the conclusions on the outcome of interest.Wider implications of the findingsGovernments in LMICs should devise appropriate ART regulatory policies and implement effective mechanisms for public financing of fertility care to improve equity in access. The findings of this review should inform advocacy for ART regulatory frameworks in LMICs and the integration of infertility treatment as an essential service under universal health coverage.Study funding/competing interestsThis work received funding from the UNDP-UNFPA-UNICEF-WHO-World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction (HRP), a cosponsored programme executed by the World Health Organization (WHO). The authors declare no competing interests.Trial registration numberThis review is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020199312.

Dataset Information

Costs of human papillomavirus vaccine delivery in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets