학술논문

Economic analysis of a new four-panel rapid screening test in antenatal care in Kenya, Rwanda, and Uganda
Document Type
article
Source
BMC Health Services Research, Vol 23, Iss 1, Pp 1-13 (2023)
Subject
Cost-effectiveness
Antenatal care
Hepatitis B
HIV/AIDS
Malaria
Syphilis
Public aspects of medicine
RA1-1270
Language
English
ISSN
1472-6963
Abstract
Abstract Background We performed an economic analysis of a new technology used in antenatal care (ANC) clinics, the ANC panel. Introduced in 2019–2020 in five Rwandan districts, the ANC panel screens for four infections [hepatitis B virus (HBV), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), malaria, and syphilis] using blood from a single fingerstick. It increases the scope and sensitivity of screening over conventional testing. Methods We developed and applied an Excel-based economic and epidemiologic model to perform cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses of this technology in Kenya, Rwanda, and Uganda. Costs include the ANC panel itself, its administration, and follow-up treatment. Effectiveness models predicted impacts on maternal and infant mortality and other outcomes. Key parameters are the baseline prevalence of each infection and the effectiveness of early treatment using observations from the Rwanda pilot, national and international literature, and expert opinion. For each parameter, we found the best estimate (with 95% confidence bound). Results The ANC panel averted 92 (69–115) disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) per 1,000 pregnant women in ANC in Kenya, 54 (52–57) in Rwanda, and 258 (156–360) in Uganda. Net healthcare costs per woman ranged from $0.53 ($0.02-$4.21) in Kenya, $1.77 ($1.23-$5.60) in Rwanda, and negative $5.01 (-$6.45 to $0.48) in Uganda. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in dollars per DALY averted were $5.76 (-$3.50-$11.13) in Kenya, $32.62 ($17.54-$46.70) in Rwanda, and negative $19.40 (-$24.18 to -$15.42) in Uganda. Benefit-cost ratios were $17.48 ($15.90-$23.71) in Kenya, $6.20 ($5.91-$6.45) in Rwanda, and $25.36 ($16.88-$33.14) in Uganda. All results appear very favorable and cost-saving in Uganda. Conclusion Though subject to uncertainty, even our lowest estimates were still favorable. By combining field data and literature, the ANC model could be applied to other countries.