Cargando…

Implementation of field detection devices for antimalarial quality screening in Lao PDR—A cost-effectiveness analysis

Substandard and falsified (SF) antimalarials have devastating consequences including increased morbidity, mortality and economic losses. Portable medicine quality screening devices are increasingly available, but whether their use for the detection of SF antimalarials is cost-effective is not known....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Luangasanatip, Nantasit, Khonputsa, Panarasri, Caillet, Céline, Vickers, Serena, Zambrzycki, Stephen, Fernández, Facundo M., Newton, Paul N., Lubell, Yoel
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8483304/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34591842
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0009539
_version_ 1784577092103438336
author Luangasanatip, Nantasit
Khonputsa, Panarasri
Caillet, Céline
Vickers, Serena
Zambrzycki, Stephen
Fernández, Facundo M.
Newton, Paul N.
Lubell, Yoel
author_facet Luangasanatip, Nantasit
Khonputsa, Panarasri
Caillet, Céline
Vickers, Serena
Zambrzycki, Stephen
Fernández, Facundo M.
Newton, Paul N.
Lubell, Yoel
author_sort Luangasanatip, Nantasit
collection PubMed
description Substandard and falsified (SF) antimalarials have devastating consequences including increased morbidity, mortality and economic losses. Portable medicine quality screening devices are increasingly available, but whether their use for the detection of SF antimalarials is cost-effective is not known. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of introducing such devices in post-market surveillance in pharmacies in Laos, conservatively focusing on their outcome in detecting SF artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs). We simulated the deployment of six portable screening devices: two handheld near-infrared [MicroPHAZIR RX, NIR-S-G1], two handheld Raman [Progeny, TruScan RM]; one portable mid-infrared [4500a FTIR] spectrometers, and single-use disposable paper analytical devices [PADs]. We considered two scenarios with high and low levels of SF ACTs. Different sampling strategies in which medicine inspectors would test 1, 2, or 3 sample(s) of each brand of ACT were evaluated. Costs of inspection including device procurement, inspector time, reagents, reference testing, and replacement with genuine ACTs were estimated. Outcomes were measured as disability adjusted life years (DALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were estimated for each device compared with a baseline of visual inspections alone. In the scenario with high levels of SF ACTs, all devices were cost-effective with a 1-sample strategy. In the scenario of low levels of SF ACTs, only four devices (MicroPHAZIR RX, 4500a FTIR, NIR-S-G1, and PADs) were cost-effective with a 1-sample strategy. In the multi-way comparative analysis, in both scenarios the NIR-S-G1 testing 2 samples was the most cost-effective option. Routine inspection of ACT quality using portable screening devices is likely to be cost-effective in the Laos context. This work should encourage policy-makers or regulators to further investigate investment in portable screening devices to detect SF medicines and reduce their associated undesired health and economic burdens.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8483304
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84833042021-10-01 Implementation of field detection devices for antimalarial quality screening in Lao PDR—A cost-effectiveness analysis Luangasanatip, Nantasit Khonputsa, Panarasri Caillet, Céline Vickers, Serena Zambrzycki, Stephen Fernández, Facundo M. Newton, Paul N. Lubell, Yoel PLoS Negl Trop Dis Research Article Substandard and falsified (SF) antimalarials have devastating consequences including increased morbidity, mortality and economic losses. Portable medicine quality screening devices are increasingly available, but whether their use for the detection of SF antimalarials is cost-effective is not known. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of introducing such devices in post-market surveillance in pharmacies in Laos, conservatively focusing on their outcome in detecting SF artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs). We simulated the deployment of six portable screening devices: two handheld near-infrared [MicroPHAZIR RX, NIR-S-G1], two handheld Raman [Progeny, TruScan RM]; one portable mid-infrared [4500a FTIR] spectrometers, and single-use disposable paper analytical devices [PADs]. We considered two scenarios with high and low levels of SF ACTs. Different sampling strategies in which medicine inspectors would test 1, 2, or 3 sample(s) of each brand of ACT were evaluated. Costs of inspection including device procurement, inspector time, reagents, reference testing, and replacement with genuine ACTs were estimated. Outcomes were measured as disability adjusted life years (DALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were estimated for each device compared with a baseline of visual inspections alone. In the scenario with high levels of SF ACTs, all devices were cost-effective with a 1-sample strategy. In the scenario of low levels of SF ACTs, only four devices (MicroPHAZIR RX, 4500a FTIR, NIR-S-G1, and PADs) were cost-effective with a 1-sample strategy. In the multi-way comparative analysis, in both scenarios the NIR-S-G1 testing 2 samples was the most cost-effective option. Routine inspection of ACT quality using portable screening devices is likely to be cost-effective in the Laos context. This work should encourage policy-makers or regulators to further investigate investment in portable screening devices to detect SF medicines and reduce their associated undesired health and economic burdens. Public Library of Science 2021-09-30 /pmc/articles/PMC8483304/ /pubmed/34591842 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0009539 Text en © 2021 Luangasanatip et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Luangasanatip, Nantasit
Khonputsa, Panarasri
Caillet, Céline
Vickers, Serena
Zambrzycki, Stephen
Fernández, Facundo M.
Newton, Paul N.
Lubell, Yoel
Implementation of field detection devices for antimalarial quality screening in Lao PDR—A cost-effectiveness analysis
title Implementation of field detection devices for antimalarial quality screening in Lao PDR—A cost-effectiveness analysis
title_full Implementation of field detection devices for antimalarial quality screening in Lao PDR—A cost-effectiveness analysis
title_fullStr Implementation of field detection devices for antimalarial quality screening in Lao PDR—A cost-effectiveness analysis
title_full_unstemmed Implementation of field detection devices for antimalarial quality screening in Lao PDR—A cost-effectiveness analysis
title_short Implementation of field detection devices for antimalarial quality screening in Lao PDR—A cost-effectiveness analysis
title_sort implementation of field detection devices for antimalarial quality screening in lao pdr—a cost-effectiveness analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8483304/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34591842
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0009539
work_keys_str_mv AT luangasanatipnantasit implementationoffielddetectiondevicesforantimalarialqualityscreeninginlaopdracosteffectivenessanalysis
AT khonputsapanarasri implementationoffielddetectiondevicesforantimalarialqualityscreeninginlaopdracosteffectivenessanalysis
AT cailletceline implementationoffielddetectiondevicesforantimalarialqualityscreeninginlaopdracosteffectivenessanalysis
AT vickersserena implementationoffielddetectiondevicesforantimalarialqualityscreeninginlaopdracosteffectivenessanalysis
AT zambrzyckistephen implementationoffielddetectiondevicesforantimalarialqualityscreeninginlaopdracosteffectivenessanalysis
AT fernandezfacundom implementationoffielddetectiondevicesforantimalarialqualityscreeninginlaopdracosteffectivenessanalysis
AT newtonpauln implementationoffielddetectiondevicesforantimalarialqualityscreeninginlaopdracosteffectivenessanalysis
AT lubellyoel implementationoffielddetectiondevicesforantimalarialqualityscreeninginlaopdracosteffectivenessanalysis