Dataset Information

A cost-effectiveness analysis of provider and community interventions to improve the treatment of uncomplicated malaria in Nigeria: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: There is mounting evidence of poor adherence by health service personnel to clinical guidelines for malaria following a symptomatic diagnosis. In response to this, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that in all settings clinical suspicion of malaria should be confirmed by parasitological diagnosis using microscopy or Rapid Diagnostic Test (RDT). The Government of Nigeria plans to introduce RDTs in public health facilities over the coming year. In this context, we will evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of two interventions designed to support the roll-out of RDTs and improve the rational use of ACTs. It is feared that without supporting interventions, non-adherence will remain a serious impediment to implementing malaria treatment guidelines.A three-arm stratified cluster randomized trial is used to compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of: (1) provider malaria training intervention versus expected standard practice in malaria diagnosis and treatment; (2) provider malaria training intervention plus school-based intervention versus expected standard practice; and (3) the combined provider plus school-based intervention versus provider intervention alone. RDTs will be introduced in all arms of the trial. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients attending facilities that report a fever or suspected malaria and receive treatment according to malaria guidelines. This will be measured by surveying patients (or caregivers) as they exit primary health centers, pharmacies, and patent medicine dealers. Cost-effectiveness will be presented in terms of the primary outcome and a range of secondary outcomes, including changes in provider and community knowledge. Costs will be estimated from both a societal and provider perspective using standard economic evaluation methodologies.Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01350752.

SUBMITTER: Wiseman V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3517748 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A cost-effectiveness analysis of provider and community interventions to improve the treatment of uncomplicated malaria in Nigeria: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Wiseman Virginia V Ogochukwu Ezeoke E Emmanuel Nwala N Lindsay J Mangham M Bonnie Cundill C Jane Enemuo E Eloka Uchegbu U Benjamin Uzochukwu U Obinna Onwujekwe O

Trials 20120609

<h4>Background</h4>There is mounting evidence of poor adherence by health service personnel to clinical guidelines for malaria following a symptomatic diagnosis. In response to this, the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that in all settings clinical suspicion of malaria should be confirmed by parasitological diagnosis using microscopy or Rapid Diagnostic Test (RDT). The Government of Nigeria plans to introduce RDTs in public health facilities over the coming year. In this context, we w ...[more]

PMID: 22682276

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe World Health Organization recommended (in 2010) universal testing for suspected malaria, due to some fundamental changes in malaria trends such as the declining incidence of malaria in high-burden countries, the emergence of parasite resistance to anti-malarial drugs especially artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) and the increased availability of diagnostic testing such as the malaria rapid diagnostic test (MRDT). The Nigerian government has long adopted this recommendation and with the support of foreign partners has scaled up the availability of MRDT. However, the malaria/MRDT rate in the communities is still far short of the recommendation. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of social group and social group/provider interventions in increasing the demand (use and/or request) for MRDT among community members with fever or malaria-like illness in Ebonyi state, Nigeria.MethodsA three-arm, parallel, stratified cluster randomized design will be used to evaluate the effect of two interventions compared to control: control involves the usual practice of provision of MRDT services by public primary healthcare providers and patent medicine vendors; social group intervention involves the sensitization/education of social groups about MRDT; social group/provider intervention involves social group treatment plus the training of healthcare providers in health communication about MRDT with clients. The primary outcome is the proportion of children under 5 years of age with fever/malaria-like illness, in the 2 weeks preceding a household survey, who received MRDT. The co-primary outcome is the proportion of children ages 5 years and above and adults (excluding pregnant women) with fever/malaria-like illness, in the 2 weeks preceding a household survey, who received MRDT. The primary outcome will be assessed through household surveys at baseline and at the end of the study.DiscussionThe pragmatic and behavioural nature of the interventions delivered to groups of individuals and the need to minimize contamination informed the use of a cluster-randomized design in this study in investigating whether the social group and social group/provider interventions will increase the demand for MRDT among community members. "Pragmatic" means the interventions would occur in natural settings or real- life situations.Trial registrationISRCTN, ISRCTN14046444 . Registered on 14 August 2018.

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.

Project description:IntroductionTools that allow for in silico optimization of available malaria control strategies can assist the decision-making process for prioritizing interventions. The OpenMalaria stochastic simulation modeling platform can be applied to simulate the impact of interventions singly and in combination as implemented in Rachuonyo South District, western Kenya, to support this goal.MethodsCombinations of malaria interventions were simulated using a previously-published, validated model of malaria epidemiology and control in the study area. An economic model of the costs of case management and malaria control interventions in Kenya was applied to simulation results and cost-effectiveness of each intervention combination compared to the corresponding simulated outputs of a scenario without interventions. Uncertainty was evaluated by varying health system and intervention delivery parameters.ResultsThe intervention strategy with the greatest simulated health impact employed long lasting insecticide treated net (LLIN) use by 80% of the population, 90% of households covered by indoor residual spraying (IRS) with deployment starting in April, and intermittent screen and treat (IST) of school children using Artemether lumefantrine (AL) with 80% coverage twice per term. However, the current malaria control strategy in the study area including LLIN use of 56% and IRS coverage of 70% was the most cost effective at reducing disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) over a five year period.ConclusionsAll the simulated intervention combinations can be considered cost effective in the context of available resources for health in Kenya. Increasing coverage of vector control interventions has a larger simulated impact compared to adding IST to the current implementation strategy, suggesting that transmission in the study area is not at a level to warrant replacing vector control to a school-based screen and treat program. These results have the potential to assist malaria control program managers in the study area in adding new or changing implementation of current interventions.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Snakebite envenoming is a major public health problem throughout the rural tropics. Antivenom is effective in reducing mortality and remains the mainstay of therapy. This study aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of using effective antivenoms for Snakebite envenoming in Nigeria. METHODOLOGY:Economic analysis was conducted from a public healthcare system perspective. Estimates of model inputs were obtained from the literature. Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) were quantified as deaths and Disability-Adjusted-Life-Years (DALY) averted from antivenom therapy. A decision analytic model was developed and analyzed with the following model base-case parameter estimates: type of snakes causing bites, antivenom effectiveness to prevent death, untreated mortality, risk of Early Adverse Reactions (EAR), mortality risk from EAR, mean age at bite and remaining life expectancy, and disability risk (amputation). End-user costs applied included: costs of diagnosing and monitoring envenoming, antivenom drug cost, supportive care, shipping/freezing antivenom, transportation to-and-from hospital and feeding costs while on admission, management of antivenom EAR and free alternative snakebite care for ineffective antivenom. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:We calculated a cost/death averted of ($2330.16) and cost/DALY averted of $99.61 discounted and $56.88 undiscounted. Varying antivenom effectiveness through the 95% confidence interval from 55% to 86% yield a cost/DALY averted of $137.02 to $86.61 respectively. Similarly, varying the prevalence of envenoming caused by carpet viper from 0% to 96% yield a cost/DALY averted of $254.18 to $78.25 respectively. More effective antivenoms and carpet viper envenoming rather than non-carpet viper envenoming were associated with lower cost/DALY averted. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE:Treatment of snakebite envenoming in Nigeria is cost-effective with a cost/death averted of $2330.16 and cost/DALY averted of $99.61 discounted, lower than the country's gross domestic product per capita of $1555 (2013). Expanding access to effective antivenoms to larger segments of the Nigerian population should be a considered a priority.

Project description:In Sub-Saharan Africa, malaria remains a major cause of morbidity and mortality among children under 5, due to lack of access to prompt and appropriate diagnosis and treatment. Many countries have scaled-up community health workers (CHWs) as a strategy towards improving access. The present study was a cost-effectiveness analysis of the introduction of malaria rapid diagnostic tests (mRDTs) performed by CHWs in two areas of moderate-to-high and low malaria transmission in rural Uganda. CHWs were trained to perform mRDTs and treat children with artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT) in the intervention arm while CHWs offered treatment based on presumptive diagnosis in the control arm. Data on the proportion of children with fever 'appropriately treated for malaria with ACT' were captured from a randomised trial. Health sector costs included: training of CHWs, community sensitisation, supervision, allowances for CHWs and provision of mRDTs and ACTs. The opportunity costs of time utilised by CHWs were estimated based on self-reporting. Household costs of subsequent treatment-seeking at public health centres and private health providers were captured in a sample of households. mRDTs performed by CHWs was associated with large improvements in appropriate treatment of malaria in both transmission settings. This resulted in low incremental costs for the health sector at US$3.0 per appropriately treated child in the moderate-to-high transmission area. Higher incremental costs at US$13.3 were found in the low transmission area due to lower utilisation of CHW services and higher programme costs. Incremental costs from a societal perspective were marginally higher. The use of mRDTs by CHWs improved the targeting of ACTs to children with malaria and was likely to be considered a cost-effective intervention compared to a presumptive diagnosis in the moderate-to-high transmission area. In contrast to this, in the low transmission area with low attendance, RDT use by CHWs was not a low cost intervention.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Virtual Communities of Practice (VCoP) or knowledge-sharing virtual communities offer ubiquitous access to information and exchange possibilities for people in similar situations, which might be especially valuable for the self-management of patients with chronic diseases. In view of the scarce evidence on the clinical and economic impact of these interventions on chronic conditions, we aim to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a VCoP in the improvement of the activation and other patient empowerment measures in patients with ischaemic heart disease (IHD). METHODS AND ANALYSIS:A pragmatic randomised controlled trial will be performed in Catalonia, Madrid and Canary Islands, Spain. Two hundred and fifty patients with a recent diagnosis of IHD attending the participating centres will be selected and randomised to the intervention or control group. The intervention group will be offered participation for 12 months in a VCoP based on a gamified web 2.0 platform where there is interaction with other patients and a multidisciplinary professional team. Intervention and control groups will receive usual care. The primary outcome will be measured with the Patient Activation Measure questionnaire at baseline, 6, 12 and 18 months. Secondary outcomes will include: clinical variables; knowledge (Questionnaire of Cardiovascular Risk Factors), attitudes (Self-efficacy Managing Chronic Disease Scale), adherence to the Mediterranean diet (Mediterranean Diet Questionnaire), level of physical activity (International Physical Activity Questionnaire), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire), anxiety (Hospital Anxiety Scale-A), medication adherence (Adherence to Refill Medication Scale), quality of life (EQ-5D-5L) and health resources use. Data will be collected from self-reported questionnaires and electronic medical records. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The trial was approved by Clinical Research Ethics Committee of Gregorio Marañón University Hospital in Madrid, Nuestra Señora de Candelaria University Hospital in Santa Cruz de Tenerife and IDIAP Jordi Gol in Barcelona. The results will be disseminated through workshops, policy briefs, peer-reviewed publications, local/international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT03959631). Pre-results.

Dataset Information

A cost-effectiveness analysis of provider and community interventions to improve the treatment of uncomplicated malaria in Nigeria: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Publications

A cost-effectiveness analysis of provider and community interventions to improve the treatment of uncomplicated malaria in Nigeria: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets