Dataset Information

Application of the malaria management model to the analysis of costs and benefits of DDT versus non-DDT malaria control.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

DDT is considered to be the most cost-effective insecticide for combating malaria. However, it is also the most environmentally persistent and can pose risks to human health when sprayed indoors. Therefore, the use of DDT for vector control remains controversial.

Methods

In this paper we develop a computer-based simulation model to assess some of the costs and benefits of the continued use of DDT for Indoor Residual Spraying (IRS) versus its rapid phase out. We apply the prototype model to the aggregated sub Saharan African region. For putting the question about the continued use of DDT for IRS versus its rapid phase out into perspective we calculate the same costs and benefits for alternative combinations of integrated vector management interventions.

Results

Our simulation results confirm that the current mix of integrated vector management interventions with DDT as the main insecticide is cheaper than the same mix with alternative insecticides when only direct costs are considered. However, combinations with a stronger focus on insecticide-treated bed nets and environmental management show higher levels of cost-effectiveness than interventions with a focus on IRS. Thus, this focus would also allow phasing out DDT in a cost-effective manner. Although a rapid phase out of DDT for IRS is the most expensive of the tested intervention combinations it can have important economic benefits in addition to health and environmental impacts that are difficult to assess in monetary terms. Those economic benefits captured by the model include the avoided risk of losses in agricultural exports.

Conclusions

The prototype simulation model illustrates how a computer-based scenario analysis tool can inform debates on malaria control policies in general and on the continued use of DDT for IRS versus its rapid phase out in specific. Simulation models create systematic mechanisms for analyzing alternative interventions and making informed trade offs.

SUBMITTER: Pedercini M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3227603 | biostudies-literature | 2011

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Application of the malaria management model to the analysis of costs and benefits of DDT versus non-DDT malaria control.

Pedercini Matteo M Movilla Blanco Santiago S Kopainsky Birgit B

PloS one 20111130 11

<h4>Introduction</h4>DDT is considered to be the most cost-effective insecticide for combating malaria. However, it is also the most environmentally persistent and can pose risks to human health when sprayed indoors. Therefore, the use of DDT for vector control remains controversial.<h4>Methods</h4>In this paper we develop a computer-based simulation model to assess some of the costs and benefits of the continued use of DDT for Indoor Residual Spraying (IRS) versus its rapid phase out. We apply ...[more]

PMID: 22140467

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCase management is one of the principal strategies for malaria control. This study aimed to estimate the economic costs of uncomplicated malaria case management and explore the influence of health-seeking behaviours on those costs.MethodsA knowledge, attitudes and practices (KAP) survey was applied to 680 households of fifteen communities in Mazan-Loreto in March 2017, then a socio-economic survey was conducted in September 2017 among 161 individuals with confirmed uncomplicated malaria in the past 3 months. Total costs per episode were estimated from both provider (Ministry of Health, MoH) and patient perspectives. Direct costs were estimated using a standard costing estimation procedure, while the indirect costs considered the loss of incomes among patients, substitute labourers and companions due to illness in terms of the monthly minimum wage. Sensitivity analysis evaluated the uncertainty of the average cost per episode.ResultsThe KAP survey showed that most individuals (79.3%) that had malaria went to a health facility for a diagnosis and treatment, 2.7% received those services from community health workers, and 8% went to a drugstore or were self-treated at home. The average total cost per episode in the Mazan district was US$ 161. The cost from the provider's perspective was US$ 30.85 per episode while from the patient's perspective the estimated cost was US$ 131 per episode. The average costs per Plasmodium falciparum episode (US$ 180) were higher than those per Plasmodium vivax episode (US$ 156) due to longer time lost from work by patients with P. falciparum infections (22.2 days) than by patients with P. vivax infections (17.0 days). The delayed malaria diagnosis (after 48 h of the onset of symptoms) was associated with the time lost from work due to illness (adjusted mean ratio 1.8; 95% CI 1.3, 2.6). The average cost per malaria episode was most sensitive to the uncertainty around the lost productivity cost due to malaria.ConclusionsDespite the provision of free malaria case management by MoH, there is delay in seeking care and the costs of uncomplicated malaria are mainly borne by the families. These costs are not well perceived by the society and the substantial financial impact of the disease can be frequently undervalued in public policy planning.

Project description:BackgroundThe control and elimination of malaria requires expanded coverage of and access to effective malaria control interventions such as insecticide-treated nets (ITNs), indoor residual spraying (IRS), intermittent preventive treatment (IPT), diagnostic testing and appropriate treatment. Decisions on how to scale up the coverage of these interventions need to be based on evidence of programme effectiveness, equity and cost-effectiveness.MethodsA systematic review of the published literature on the costs and cost-effectiveness of malaria interventions was undertaken. All costs and cost-effectiveness ratios were inflated to 2009 USD to allow comparison of the costs and benefits of several different interventions through various delivery channels, across different geographical regions and from varying costing perspectives.ResultsFifty-five studies of the costs and forty three studies of the cost-effectiveness of malaria interventions were identified, 78% of which were undertaken in sub-Saharan Africa, 18% in Asia and 4% in South America. The median financial cost of protecting one person for one year was $2.20 (range $0.88-$9.54) for ITNs, $6.70 (range $2.22-$12.85) for IRS, $0.60 (range $0.48-$1.08) for IPT in infants, $4.03 (range $1.25-$11.80) for IPT in children, and $2.06 (range $0.47-$3.36) for IPT in pregnant women. The median financial cost of diagnosing a case of malaria was $4.32 (range $0.34-$9.34). The median financial cost of treating an episode of uncomplicated malaria was $5.84 (range $2.36-$23.65) and the median financial cost of treating an episode of severe malaria was $30.26 (range $15.64-$137.87). Economies of scale were observed in the implementation of ITNs, IRS and IPT, with lower unit costs reported in studies with larger numbers of beneficiaries. From a provider perspective, the median incremental cost effectiveness ratio per disability adjusted life year averted was $27 (range $8.15-$110) for ITNs, $143 (range $135-$150) for IRS, and $24 (range $1.08-$44.24) for IPT.ConclusionsA transparent evidence base on the costs and cost-effectiveness of malaria control interventions is provided to inform rational resource allocation by donors and domestic health budgets and the selection of optimal packages of interventions by malaria control programmes.

Dataset Information

Application of the malaria management model to the analysis of costs and benefits of DDT versus non-DDT malaria control.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Application of the malaria management model to the analysis of costs and benefits of DDT versus non-DDT malaria control.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets