Cargando…

Cost-effectiveness of malaria microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests versus presumptive diagnosis: implications for malaria control in Uganda

BACKGROUND: Current Uganda National Malaria treatment guidelines recommend parasitological confirmation either by microscopy or rapid diagnostic test (RDT) before treatment with artemether-lumefantrine (AL). However, the cost-effectiveness of these strategies has not been assessed at rural operation...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Batwala, Vincent, Magnussen, Pascal, Hansen, Kristian S, Nuwaha, Fred
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3266346/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22182735
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-10-372
_version_ 1782222169186500608
author Batwala, Vincent
Magnussen, Pascal
Hansen, Kristian S
Nuwaha, Fred
author_facet Batwala, Vincent
Magnussen, Pascal
Hansen, Kristian S
Nuwaha, Fred
author_sort Batwala, Vincent
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Current Uganda National Malaria treatment guidelines recommend parasitological confirmation either by microscopy or rapid diagnostic test (RDT) before treatment with artemether-lumefantrine (AL). However, the cost-effectiveness of these strategies has not been assessed at rural operational primary care centres. METHODS: Three health centres (HCs) were randomized to three diagnostic arms (microscopy, RDT and presumptive diagnosis) in a district of low and another of high malaria transmission intensities in Uganda. Some 22,052 patients presenting with fever at outpatients departments were enrolled from March 2010 to February 2011. Of these, a random sample of 1,627 was selected to measure additional socio-economic characteristics. Costing was performed following the standard step-down cost allocation and the ingredients approach. Effectiveness was measured as the number and proportion of patients correctly diagnosed and treated. Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) were estimated from the societal perspective (http://Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00565071). RESULTS: Overall RDT was most cost-effective with lowest ICER US$5.0 compared to microscopy US$9.61 per case correctly diagnosed and treated. In the high transmission setting, ICER was US$4.38 for RDT and US$12.98 for microscopy. The corresponding ICERs in the low transmission setting were US$5.85 and US$7.63 respectively. The difference in ICERs between RDT and microscopy was greater in the high transmission area (US$8.9) than in low transmission setting (US$1.78). At a willingness to pay of US$2.8, RDT remained cost effective up to a threshold value of the cost of treatment of US$4.7. CONCLUSION: RDT was cost effective in both low and high transmission settings. With a global campaign to reduce the costs of AL and RDT, the Malaria Control Programme and stakeholders need a strategy for malaria diagnosis because as the cost of AL decreases, presumptive treatment is likely to become more attractive.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3266346
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-32663462012-01-26 Cost-effectiveness of malaria microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests versus presumptive diagnosis: implications for malaria control in Uganda Batwala, Vincent Magnussen, Pascal Hansen, Kristian S Nuwaha, Fred Malar J Research BACKGROUND: Current Uganda National Malaria treatment guidelines recommend parasitological confirmation either by microscopy or rapid diagnostic test (RDT) before treatment with artemether-lumefantrine (AL). However, the cost-effectiveness of these strategies has not been assessed at rural operational primary care centres. METHODS: Three health centres (HCs) were randomized to three diagnostic arms (microscopy, RDT and presumptive diagnosis) in a district of low and another of high malaria transmission intensities in Uganda. Some 22,052 patients presenting with fever at outpatients departments were enrolled from March 2010 to February 2011. Of these, a random sample of 1,627 was selected to measure additional socio-economic characteristics. Costing was performed following the standard step-down cost allocation and the ingredients approach. Effectiveness was measured as the number and proportion of patients correctly diagnosed and treated. Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) were estimated from the societal perspective (http://Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00565071). RESULTS: Overall RDT was most cost-effective with lowest ICER US$5.0 compared to microscopy US$9.61 per case correctly diagnosed and treated. In the high transmission setting, ICER was US$4.38 for RDT and US$12.98 for microscopy. The corresponding ICERs in the low transmission setting were US$5.85 and US$7.63 respectively. The difference in ICERs between RDT and microscopy was greater in the high transmission area (US$8.9) than in low transmission setting (US$1.78). At a willingness to pay of US$2.8, RDT remained cost effective up to a threshold value of the cost of treatment of US$4.7. CONCLUSION: RDT was cost effective in both low and high transmission settings. With a global campaign to reduce the costs of AL and RDT, the Malaria Control Programme and stakeholders need a strategy for malaria diagnosis because as the cost of AL decreases, presumptive treatment is likely to become more attractive. BioMed Central 2011-12-19 /pmc/articles/PMC3266346/ /pubmed/22182735 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-10-372 Text en Copyright ©2011 Batwala et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Batwala, Vincent
Magnussen, Pascal
Hansen, Kristian S
Nuwaha, Fred
Cost-effectiveness of malaria microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests versus presumptive diagnosis: implications for malaria control in Uganda
title Cost-effectiveness of malaria microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests versus presumptive diagnosis: implications for malaria control in Uganda
title_full Cost-effectiveness of malaria microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests versus presumptive diagnosis: implications for malaria control in Uganda
title_fullStr Cost-effectiveness of malaria microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests versus presumptive diagnosis: implications for malaria control in Uganda
title_full_unstemmed Cost-effectiveness of malaria microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests versus presumptive diagnosis: implications for malaria control in Uganda
title_short Cost-effectiveness of malaria microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests versus presumptive diagnosis: implications for malaria control in Uganda
title_sort cost-effectiveness of malaria microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests versus presumptive diagnosis: implications for malaria control in uganda
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3266346/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22182735
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-10-372
work_keys_str_mv AT batwalavincent costeffectivenessofmalariamicroscopyandrapiddiagnostictestsversuspresumptivediagnosisimplicationsformalariacontrolinuganda
AT magnussenpascal costeffectivenessofmalariamicroscopyandrapiddiagnostictestsversuspresumptivediagnosisimplicationsformalariacontrolinuganda
AT hansenkristians costeffectivenessofmalariamicroscopyandrapiddiagnostictestsversuspresumptivediagnosisimplicationsformalariacontrolinuganda
AT nuwahafred costeffectivenessofmalariamicroscopyandrapiddiagnostictestsversuspresumptivediagnosisimplicationsformalariacontrolinuganda