Dataset Information

Advocating an attack against severe malaria: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:A recent study found that the gut microbiota, Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium, have the ability to modulate the severity of malaria. The modulation of the severity of malaria is not however, the typical focal point of most widespread interventions. Thus, an essential element of information required before serious consideration of any intervention that targets reducing severe malaria incidence is a prediction of the health benefits and costs required to be cost-effective. METHODS:Here, we developed a mathematical model of malaria transmission to evaluate an intervention that targets reducing severe malaria incidence. We consider intervention scenarios of a 2-, 7-, and 14-fold reduction in severe malaria incidence, based on the potential reduction in severe malaria incidence caused by gut microbiota, under entomological inoculation rates occurring in 41 countries in sub-Saharan Africa. For each intervention scenario, disability-adjusted life years averted and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were estimated using country specific data, including the reported proportions of severe malaria incidence in healthcare settings. RESULTS:Our results show that an intervention that targets reducing severe malaria incidence with annual costs between $23.65 to $30.26 USD per person and causes a 14-fold reduction in severe malaria incidence would be cost-effective in 15-19 countries and very cost-effective in 9-14 countries respectively. Furthermore, if model predictions are based on the distribution of gut microbiota through a freeze-dried yogurt that cost $0.20 per serving, a 2- to 14-fold reduction in severe malaria incidence would be cost-effective in 29 countries and very cost-effective in 25 countries. CONCLUSION:Our findings indicate interventions that target severe malaria can be cost-effective, in conjunction with standard interventions, for reducing the health burden and costs attributed to malaria. While our results illustrate a stronger cost-effectiveness for greater reductions, they consistently show that even a limited reduction in severe malaria provides substantial health benefits, and could be economically viable. Therefore, we suggest that interventions that target severe malaria are worthy of consideration, and merit further empirical and clinical investigation.

SUBMITTER: Greenhalgh S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6947859 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Advocating an attack against severe malaria: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Greenhalgh Scott S Chandwani Veda V

BMC public health 20200107 1

<h4>Background</h4>A recent study found that the gut microbiota, Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium, have the ability to modulate the severity of malaria. The modulation of the severity of malaria is not however, the typical focal point of most widespread interventions. Thus, an essential element of information required before serious consideration of any intervention that targets reducing severe malaria incidence is a prediction of the health benefits and costs required to be cost-effective.<h4> ...[more]

PMID: 31910842

Similar Datasets

Project description:In 2013, 78% of malaria deaths occurred in children aged 5 years and below, in sub-Saharan Africa. Treatment of severe malaria requires a health facility with inpatient care. However, in most sub-Sahara African countries, access to health facilities is a major problem. Pre-referral antimalarial treatments aim to delay the progress of severe malaria as patients seek to access health facilities. Rectal artesunate can be administered in the community as a pre-referral treatment in rural hard-to-reach areas. In Kenya, though pre-referral rectal artesunate has been included in the National Guidelines for pre-referral treatment, it is yet to be implemented in the public healthcare system. It is important, therefore, to establish its cost-utility compared to current parenteral treatments. This study evaluated the cost-utility of provision of pre-referral treatments by community health workers compared to similar services at a primary health facility.This was a decision model-based cost-utility analysis, comparing pre-referral antimalarial treatments provided by: community health workers (CHWs), primary health facility, direct access to a tertiary health facility and no access to treatment. A theoretical cohort, of 1000 children, who were below 5 years old; residing in rural hard-to-reach areas, was taken as the reference population. Data was collected through key informant interviews, to assess the costs, while key measures of effectiveness, were obtained from existing studies. The key measure of outcomes was Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALYS) averted. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was carried out to assess the robustness of the model.Provision of rectal pre-referral treatment by community health workers was estimated to avert 13,276 DALYs, at a cost of $68,428 for a cohort of 1000 children. Provision of rectal pre-referral treatment at a primary health facility was estimated to avert 9993 DALYs, at a cost of $73,826 for a cohort of 1000 children, while going directly to a tertiary health facility was estimated to avert 15,801 DALYs, at a cost of $114,903 for a cohort of 1000 children. The incremental cost effectiveness ratios for provision of pre-referral treatment by community health care and primary health workers were $5.11 and $7.30 per DALYs averted respectively.Use of CHWs was more cost effective than provision of pre-referral treatments at a primary health facility especially, with high referral compliance. Rectal artesunate can easily be administered by community health workers, unlike parenteral pre-referral interventions.

Project description:Background: Lupus nephritis (LN) is the most common secondary glomerular diseases that will cause end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and renal-related death. The cost-effectiveness of various treatments for LN recommended by official guidelines has not been investigated in China. Our study is to evaluate clinical prognosis and cost-effectiveness of the current treatments for severe LN. Methods: A Markov model was simulated for 1,000 LN patients of 30 years old, over a 3-years and 30-years lifetime horizon respectively. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of six therapeutic strategies from a societal perspective, with cyclophosphamide (CYC) or mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) induction therapy followed by CYC, MMF or azathioprine (AZA) maintenance therapy. Main outcomes included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and clinical prognosis. One and three times gross domestic product (GDP) per capita were used as the willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds. We also carried out sensitivity analysis under a lifetime horizon. Results: Compared with the baseline strategy of CYC induction and maintenance, for a 3-years horizon the most cost-effective strategy was CYC induction and AZA maintenance with $448 per QALY gained, followed by MMF induction and AZA maintenance which however was not cost-effective under the one times GDP per capita WTP threshold. For a lifetime horizon, CYC induction and AZA maintenance remained the most cost-effective strategy but MMF induction and maintenance became cost-effective under the one times GDP per capita WTP threshold and achieved a higher complete remission rate (57.2 versus 48.9%) and lower risks of ESRD (3.3 versus 5.8%) and all-cause mortality (36.0 versus 40.8%). The risk of developing ESRD during maintenance was the most influential parameter affecting ICER. Conclusions: The strategy of CYC induction followed by AZA maintenance was the most cost-effective strategy in China for short-term treatment, while the strategy of MMF in both induction and maintenance became cost-effective and yielded more desirable clinical outcomes for lifetime treatment. The uncertainty analysis supported the need for monitoring the progression to ESRD.

Project description:BackgroundChildren hospitalised with severe anaemia in malaria-endemic areas are at a high risk of dying or being readmitted within six months of discharge. A trial in Kenya and Uganda showed that three months of postdischarge malaria chemoprevention (PDMC) with monthly dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (DP) substantially reduced this risk. The World Health Organization recently included PDMC in its malaria chemoprevention guidelines. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of community-based PDMC delivery (supplying all three PDMC-DP courses to caregivers at discharge to administer at home), facility-based PDMC delivery (monthly dispensing of PDMC-DP at the hospital), and the standard of care (no PDMC).MethodsWe combined data from two recently completed trials; one placebo-controlled trial in Kenya and Uganda collecting efficacy data (May 6, 2016 until November 15, 2018; n=1049), and one delivery mechanism trial from Malawi collecting adherence data (March 24, 2016 until October 3, 2018; n=375). Cost data were collected alongside both trials. Three Markov decision models, one each for Malawi, Kenya, and Uganda, were used to compute incremental cost-effectiveness ratios expressed as costs per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to account for uncertainty.FindingsBoth PDMC strategies were cost-saving in each country, meaning less costly and more effective in increasing health-adjusted life expectancy than the standard of care. The estimated incremental cost savings for community-based PDMC compared to the standard of care were US$ 22·10 (Malawi), 38·52 (Kenya), and 26·23 (Uganda) per child treated. The incremental effectiveness gain using either PDMC strategy varied between 0·3 and 0·4 QALYs. Community-based PDMC was less costly and more effective than facility-based PDMC. These results remained robust in sensitivity analyses.InterpretationPDMC under implementation conditions is cost-saving. Caregivers receiving PDMC at discharge is a cost-effective delivery strategy for implementation in malaria-endemic southeastern African settings.FundingResearch Council of Norway.

Project description:IntroductionSince September 2020, Chinese populations aged > 3 years have been encouraged to receive a two-dose inoculation with vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the current vaccination strategy amongst the general population in mainland China from a societal perspective.MethodsIn this study, we construct a decision tree with Markov models to compare the economic and health consequences of the current vaccination strategy versus a no-vaccination scenario, over a time horizon of one year and an annual discount rate of 5%. Transition probabilities, health utilities, healthcare costs, and productivity losses are estimated from literature. Outcome measures include infection rates, death rates, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) is then calculated to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the current vaccination strategy, and both one-way deterministic sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) are applied to assess the impact of uncertainties on results.ResultsOur simulation indicates that compared with a no-vaccination scenario, vaccination amongst the general population in mainland China would reduce the infection rate from 100% to 45.3% and decrease the death rate from 6.8% to 3.1%. Consequently, the strategy will lead to a saving of 37,664.77 CNY (US$5,256.70) and a gain of 0.50 QALYs per person per year on average (lifetime QALY and productivity loss due to immature death are included). The cost-saving for each QALY gain is 74,895.69 CNY (US$10,452.85). Result of the PSA indicates that vaccination is the dominating strategy with a probability of 97.9%, and the strategy is cost-effective with a probability of 98.5% when the willingness-to-pay (WTP) is 72,000 CNY (US$10,048.71) per QALY.ConclusionCompared with a no-vaccination scenario, vaccination among the general population in mainland China is the dominating strategy from a societal perspective. The conclusion is considered robust in the sensitivity analyses.

Project description:BackgroundA wide range of possible malaria vaccines is being considered and there is a need to identify which vaccines should be prioritized for clinical development. An important element of the information needed for this prioritization is a prediction of the cost-effectiveness of potential vaccines in the transmission settings in which they are likely to be deployed. This analysis needs to consider a range of delivery modalities to ensure that clinical development plans can be aligned with the most appropriate deployment strategies.MethodsThe simulations are based on a previously published individual-based stochastic model for the natural history and epidemiology of Plasmodium falciparum malaria. Three different vaccine types: pre-erythrocytic vaccines (PEV), blood stage vaccines (BSV), mosquito-stage transmission-blocking vaccines (MSTBV), and combinations of these, are considered each delivered via a range of delivery modalities (Expanded Programme of Immunization - EPI-, EPI with booster, and mass vaccination combined with EPI). The cost-effectiveness ratios presented are calculated for four health outcomes, for assumed vaccine prices of US$ 2 or US$ 10 per dose, projected over a 10-year period.ResultsThe simulations suggest that PEV will be more cost-effective in low transmission settings, while BSV at higher transmission settings. Combinations of BSV and PEV are more efficient than PEV, especially in moderate to high transmission settings, while compared to BSV they are more cost-effective in moderate to low transmission settings. Combinations of MSTBV and PEV or PEV and BSV improve the effectiveness and the cost-effectiveness compared to PEV and BSV alone only when applied with EPI and mass vaccinations. Adding booster doses to the EPI is unlikely to be a cost-effective alternative to delivering vaccines via the EPI for any vaccine, while mass vaccination improves effectiveness, especially in low transmission settings, and is often a more efficient alternative to the EPI. However, the costs of increasing the coverage of mass vaccination over 50% often exceed the benefits.ConclusionThe simulations indicate malaria vaccines might be efficient malaria control interventions, and that both transmission setting and vaccine delivery modality are important to their cost-effectiveness. Alternative vaccine delivery modalities to the EPI may be more efficient than the EPI. Mass vaccination is predicted to provide substantial health benefits at low additional costs, although achieving high coverage rates can lead to substantial incremental costs.

Project description:BackgroundMalaria vector control activities in Sudan rely largely on Long-Lasting Insecticidal Nets (LLINs), Indoor Residual Spray (IRS) and Larval Source Management (LSM). The present study attempted to determine cost effectiveness of inputs and operations of vector control interventions applied in different environmental settings in central and eastern Sudan, as well as their impact.MethodsThe inputs utilized and cost of each vector control activity, operational achievements and impact of the applied malaria vector control activities; IRS, LLINs and LSM were determined for eight sites in Al Gazira state (central Sudan) and Al Gadarif state (eastern Sudan). Operational costs were obtained from data of the National Malaria Control Program in 2017. Impact was measured using entomological indicators for Anopheles mosquitoes.ResultsThe total cost per person per year was $1.6, $0.85, and $0.32 for IRS, LLINs and LSM, respectively. Coverage of vector control operations was 97%, 95.2% and 25-50% in IRS, LLINs and LSM, respectively. Vectorial capacity of malaria vectors showed statistically significant variations (P < 0.034) and ranged 0.294-0.65 in areas implemented LSM in comparison to 0.097-0.248 in areas applied IRS and LLINs, respectively. Both indoor and outdoor biting Anopheles mosquitoes showed noticeable increase that reached 3-12 folds in areas implemented LSM in comparison to areas implemented IRS and LLINs. Annual malaria prevalence was 13.1-21.1% in areas implemented LSM in comparison to 3.20%, 4.77% in areas implemented IRS and LLINs, respectively.ConclusionIRS and LLINs are cost effective control measures due to adequate inputs and organized process. However, the unit cost of LSM intervention per outcome and subsequently the impact is hugely affected by the low coverage. The very weak support for implementation of LSM which includes inputs resulted in weakness of its process and consequently its impact. Implementation of LSM by local government in urban settings is challenged by many factors the most important are maintenance of adequate stable level of funding, un-adequate number of well trained health workers, unstable political and administrative conditions and weak infrastructure. These challenges are critical for proper implementation of LSM and control of malaria in urban settings in Sudan.

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.

Dataset Information

Advocating an attack against severe malaria: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Publications

Advocating an attack against severe malaria: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets