Cargando…

Balancing efficiency, equity and feasibility of HIV treatment in South Africa – development of programmatic guidance

South Africa, the country with the largest HIV epidemic worldwide, has been scaling up treatment since 2003 and is rapidly expanding its eligibility criteria. The HIV treatment programme has achieved significant results, and had 1.8 million people on treatment per 2011. Despite these achievements, i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Baltussen, Rob, Mikkelsen, Evelinn, Tromp, Noor, Hurtig, AnneKarin, Byskov, Jens, Olsen, Øystein, Bærøe, Kristine, Hontelez, Jan A, Singh, Jerome, Norheim, Ole F
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3851565/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24107435
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1478-7547-11-26
_version_ 1782294306882584576
author Baltussen, Rob
Mikkelsen, Evelinn
Tromp, Noor
Hurtig, AnneKarin
Byskov, Jens
Olsen, Øystein
Bærøe, Kristine
Hontelez, Jan A
Singh, Jerome
Norheim, Ole F
author_facet Baltussen, Rob
Mikkelsen, Evelinn
Tromp, Noor
Hurtig, AnneKarin
Byskov, Jens
Olsen, Øystein
Bærøe, Kristine
Hontelez, Jan A
Singh, Jerome
Norheim, Ole F
author_sort Baltussen, Rob
collection PubMed
description South Africa, the country with the largest HIV epidemic worldwide, has been scaling up treatment since 2003 and is rapidly expanding its eligibility criteria. The HIV treatment programme has achieved significant results, and had 1.8 million people on treatment per 2011. Despite these achievements, it is now facing major concerns regarding (i) efficiency: alternative treatment policies may save more lives for the same budget; (ii) equity: there are large inequalities in who receives treatment; (iii) feasibility: still only 52% of the eligible population receives treatment. Hence, decisions on the design of the present HIV treatment programme in South Africa can be considered suboptimal. We argue there are two fundamental reasons to this. First, while there is a rapidly growing evidence-base to guide priority setting decisions on HIV treatment, its included studies typically consider only one criterion at a time and thus fail to capture the broad range of values that stakeholders have. Second, priority setting on HIV treatment is a highly political process but it seems no adequate participatory processes are in place to incorporate stakeholders’ views and evidences of all sorts. We propose an alternative approach that provides a better evidence base and outlines a fair policy process to improve priority setting in HIV treatment. The approach integrates two increasingly important frameworks on health care priority setting: accountability for reasonableness (A4R) to foster procedural fairness, and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to construct an evidence-base on the feasibility, efficiency, and equity of programme options including trade-offs. The approach provides programmatic guidance on the choice of treatment strategies at various decisions levels based on a sound conceptual framework, and holds large potential to improve HIV priority setting in South Africa.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3851565
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-38515652013-12-06 Balancing efficiency, equity and feasibility of HIV treatment in South Africa – development of programmatic guidance Baltussen, Rob Mikkelsen, Evelinn Tromp, Noor Hurtig, AnneKarin Byskov, Jens Olsen, Øystein Bærøe, Kristine Hontelez, Jan A Singh, Jerome Norheim, Ole F Cost Eff Resour Alloc Methodology South Africa, the country with the largest HIV epidemic worldwide, has been scaling up treatment since 2003 and is rapidly expanding its eligibility criteria. The HIV treatment programme has achieved significant results, and had 1.8 million people on treatment per 2011. Despite these achievements, it is now facing major concerns regarding (i) efficiency: alternative treatment policies may save more lives for the same budget; (ii) equity: there are large inequalities in who receives treatment; (iii) feasibility: still only 52% of the eligible population receives treatment. Hence, decisions on the design of the present HIV treatment programme in South Africa can be considered suboptimal. We argue there are two fundamental reasons to this. First, while there is a rapidly growing evidence-base to guide priority setting decisions on HIV treatment, its included studies typically consider only one criterion at a time and thus fail to capture the broad range of values that stakeholders have. Second, priority setting on HIV treatment is a highly political process but it seems no adequate participatory processes are in place to incorporate stakeholders’ views and evidences of all sorts. We propose an alternative approach that provides a better evidence base and outlines a fair policy process to improve priority setting in HIV treatment. The approach integrates two increasingly important frameworks on health care priority setting: accountability for reasonableness (A4R) to foster procedural fairness, and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to construct an evidence-base on the feasibility, efficiency, and equity of programme options including trade-offs. The approach provides programmatic guidance on the choice of treatment strategies at various decisions levels based on a sound conceptual framework, and holds large potential to improve HIV priority setting in South Africa. BioMed Central 2013-10-09 /pmc/articles/PMC3851565/ /pubmed/24107435 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1478-7547-11-26 Text en Copyright © 2013 Baltussen 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 Methodology
Baltussen, Rob
Mikkelsen, Evelinn
Tromp, Noor
Hurtig, AnneKarin
Byskov, Jens
Olsen, Øystein
Bærøe, Kristine
Hontelez, Jan A
Singh, Jerome
Norheim, Ole F
Balancing efficiency, equity and feasibility of HIV treatment in South Africa – development of programmatic guidance
title Balancing efficiency, equity and feasibility of HIV treatment in South Africa – development of programmatic guidance
title_full Balancing efficiency, equity and feasibility of HIV treatment in South Africa – development of programmatic guidance
title_fullStr Balancing efficiency, equity and feasibility of HIV treatment in South Africa – development of programmatic guidance
title_full_unstemmed Balancing efficiency, equity and feasibility of HIV treatment in South Africa – development of programmatic guidance
title_short Balancing efficiency, equity and feasibility of HIV treatment in South Africa – development of programmatic guidance
title_sort balancing efficiency, equity and feasibility of hiv treatment in south africa – development of programmatic guidance
topic Methodology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3851565/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24107435
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1478-7547-11-26
work_keys_str_mv AT baltussenrob balancingefficiencyequityandfeasibilityofhivtreatmentinsouthafricadevelopmentofprogrammaticguidance
AT mikkelsenevelinn balancingefficiencyequityandfeasibilityofhivtreatmentinsouthafricadevelopmentofprogrammaticguidance
AT trompnoor balancingefficiencyequityandfeasibilityofhivtreatmentinsouthafricadevelopmentofprogrammaticguidance
AT hurtigannekarin balancingefficiencyequityandfeasibilityofhivtreatmentinsouthafricadevelopmentofprogrammaticguidance
AT byskovjens balancingefficiencyequityandfeasibilityofhivtreatmentinsouthafricadevelopmentofprogrammaticguidance
AT olsenøystein balancingefficiencyequityandfeasibilityofhivtreatmentinsouthafricadevelopmentofprogrammaticguidance
AT bærøekristine balancingefficiencyequityandfeasibilityofhivtreatmentinsouthafricadevelopmentofprogrammaticguidance
AT hontelezjana balancingefficiencyequityandfeasibilityofhivtreatmentinsouthafricadevelopmentofprogrammaticguidance
AT singhjerome balancingefficiencyequityandfeasibilityofhivtreatmentinsouthafricadevelopmentofprogrammaticguidance
AT norheimolef balancingefficiencyequityandfeasibilityofhivtreatmentinsouthafricadevelopmentofprogrammaticguidance