Tuberculosis patients face high treatment support costs in Colombia, 2021.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the baseline to measure one of the three indicators of the World Health Organization (WHO) End TB strategy (2015-2035), measure the costs incurred by patients affected by tuberculosis (TB) during a treatment episode and estimate the proportion of households facing catastrophic costs (CC) and associated risk factors, in Colombia, 2021. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A nationally representative cross-sectional survey was conducted among participants on TB treatment in Colombia, using telephone interviews due to the exceptional context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey collected household costs (direct [medical and non-medical out-of-pocket expenses] and indirect) over an episode of TB, loss of time, coping measures, self-reported income, and asset ownership. Total costs were expressed as a proportion of annual household income and analyzed for risk factors of CC (defined as costs above 20% annual household income). RESULTS: The proportion of TB-affected households incurring in costs above 20% annual household income (CC) was 51.7% (95%CI: 45.4-58.0) overall, 51.3% (95%CI: 44.9-57.7) among patients with drug-sensitive (DS) TB, and 65.0% (95%CI: 48.0-82.0) among drug-resistant (DR). The average patient cost of a TB case in Colombia was $1,218 (95%CI 1,106-1,330) including $860.9 (95%CI 776.1-945.7) for non-medical costs, $339 (95%CI 257-421) for the indirect costs, and $18.1 (95%CI 11.9-24.4) for the medical costs. The factors that influenced the probability of facing CC were income quintile, job loss, DR-TB patient, and TB type. CONCLUSION: Main cost drivers for CC were non-medical out-of-pocket expenses and income loss (indirect costs). Current social protection programs ought to be expanded to mitigate the proportion of TB-affected households facing CC in Colombia, especially those with lower income levels.

Costs incurred by people receiving tuberculosis treatment in low-income and middle-income countries: a meta-regression analysis.

BACKGROUND: People accessing and completing treatment for tuberculosis can face large economic costs, even when treatment is provided free of charge. The WHO End TB Strategy targets the elimination of catastrophic costs among tuberculosis-affected households. While low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) represent 99% of global tuberculosis cases, only 29 of 135 LMICs had conducted national surveys of costs for patients with tuberculosis by December, 2022. We estimated costs for patients with tuberculosis in countries that have not conducted a national survey, to provide evidence on the economic burden of tuberculosis in these settings and inform estimates of global economic burden. METHODS: We extracted data from 22 national surveys of costs faced by patients with tuberculosis that were completed across 2015-22 and met inclusion criteria. Using a Bayesian meta-regression approach, we used these data and covariate data for all 135 LMICs to estimate per-patient costs (2021 US$) by cost category (ie, direct medical, direct non-medical, and indirect), country, drug resistance, and household income quintile. We also estimated the proportion of households experiencing catastrophic total costs (defined as >20% of annual household income) as a result of tuberculosis disease. FINDINGS: Across LMICs, mean direct medical costs incurred by patients with tuberculosis were estimated as US$211 (95% uncertainty interval 154-302), direct non-medical costs were $512 (428-620), and indirect costs were $530 (423-663) per episode of tuberculosis. Overall, per-patient costs were $1253 (1127-1417). Estimated proportions of tuberculosis-affected households experiencing catastrophic total costs ranged from 75·2% (70·3-80·0) in the poorest quintile to 42·5% (34·3-51·5) in the richest quintile, compared with 54·9% (47·0-63·2) overall. INTERPRETATION: Tuberculosis diagnosis and treatment impose substantial costs on affected households. Eliminating these economic losses is crucial for removing barriers to accessing tuberculosis diagnosis and completing treatment among affected households and achieving the targets set in WHO's End TB Strategy. FUNDING: World Health Organization.

The potential impact of novel tuberculosis vaccines on health equity and financial protection in low-income and middle-income countries.

INTRODUCTION: One in two patients developing tuberculosis (TB) in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) faces catastrophic household costs. We assessed the potential financial risk protection from introducing novel TB vaccines, and how health and economic benefits would be distributed across income quintiles. METHODS: We modelled the impact of introducing TB vaccines meeting the World Health Organization preferred product characteristics in 105 LMICs. For each country, we assessed the distribution of health gains, patient costs and household financial vulnerability following introduction of an infant vaccine and separately for an adolescent/adult vaccine, compared with a 'no-new-vaccine' counterfactual. Patient-incurred direct and indirect costs of TB disease exceeding 20% of annual household income were defined as catastrophic. RESULTS: Over 2028-2050, the health gains resulting from vaccine introduction were greatest in lower income quintiles, with the poorest 2 quintiles in each country accounting for 56% of total LMIC TB cases averted. Over this period, the infant vaccine was estimated to avert US$5.9 (95% uncertainty interval: US$5.3-6.5) billion in patient-incurred total costs, and the adolescent/adult vaccine was estimated to avert US$38.9 (US$36.6-41.5) billion. Additionally, 3.7 (3.3-4.1) million fewer households were projected to face catastrophic costs with the infant vaccine and 22.9 (21.4-24.5) million with the adolescent/adult vaccine, with 66% of gains accruing in the poorest 2 income quintiles. CONCLUSION: Under a range of assumptions, introducing novel TB vaccines would reduce income-based inequalities in the health and household economic outcomes of TB in LMICs.

Scaling Up TB Screening and TB Preventive Treatment Globally: Key Actions and Healthcare Service Costs.

The 2018 United Nations High-Level Meeting on Tuberculosis (UNHLM) set targets for case detection and TB preventive treatment (TPT) by 2022. However, by the start of 2022, about 13.7 million TB patients still needed to be detected and treated, and 21.8 million household contacts needed to be given TPT globally. To inform future target setting, we examined how the 2018 UNHLM targets could have been achieved using WHO-recommended interventions for TB detection and TPT in 33 high-TB burden countries in the final year of the period covered by the UNHLM targets. We used OneHealth-TIME model outputs combined with the unit cost of interventions to derive the total costs of health services. Our model estimated that, in order to achieve UNHLM targets, >45 million people attending health facilities with symptoms would have needed to be evaluated for TB. An additional 23.1 million people with HIV, 19.4 million household TB contacts, and 303 million individuals from high-risk groups would have required systematic screening for TB. The estimated total costs amounted to ~USD 6.7 billion, of which ~15% was required for passive case finding, ~10% for screening people with HIV, ~4% for screening household contacts, ~65% for screening other risk groups, and ~6% for providing TPT to household contacts. Significant mobilization of additional domestic and international investments in TB healthcare services will be needed to reach such targets in the future.

National tuberculosis spending efficiency and its associated factors in 121 low-income and middle-income countries, 2010-19: a data envelopment and stochastic frontier analysis.

BACKGROUND: Maximising the efficiency of national tuberculosis programmes is key to improving service coverage, outcomes, and progress towards End TB targets. We aimed to determine the overall efficiency of tuberculosis spending and investigate associated factors in 121 low-income and middle-income countries between 2010 and 2019. METHODS: In this data envelopment and stochastic frontier analysis, we used data from the WHO Global TB report series on tuberculosis spending as the input and treatment coverage as the output to estimate tuberculosis spending efficiency. We investigated associations between 25 independent variables and overall efficiency. FINDINGS: We estimated global tuberculosis spending efficiency to be between 73·8% (95% CI 71·2-76·3) and 87·7% (84·9-90·6) in 2019, depending on the analytical method used. This estimate suggests that existing global tuberculosis treatment coverage could be increased by between 12·3% (95% CI 9·4-15·1) and 26·2% (23·7-28·8) for the same amount of spending. Efficiency has improved over the study period, mainly since 2015, but a substantial difference of 70·7-72·1 percentage points between the most and least efficient countries still exists. We found a consistent significant association between efficiency and current health expenditure as a share of gross domestic product, out-of-pocket spending on health, and some Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) indicators such as universal health coverage. INTERPRETATION: To improve efficiency, treatment coverage will need to be increased, particularly in the least efficient contexts where this might require additional spending. However, progress towards global End TB targets is slow even in the most efficient countries. Variables associated with TB spending efficiency suggest efficiency is complimented by commitments to improving health-care access that is free at the point of use and wider progress towards the SDGs. These findings support calls for additional investment in tuberculosis care. FUNDING: None.

Correction to: A Systematic Review of Methodological Variation in Healthcare Provider Perspective Tuberculosis Costing Papers Conducted in Low- and Middle-Income Settings, Using An Intervention-Standardised Unit Cost Typology.

In the original version of this article, Fig. 3 was published in an incorrect format. The correct figure is published with this correction.

A Systematic Review of Methodological Variation in Healthcare Provider Perspective Tuberculosis Costing Papers Conducted in Low- and Middle-Income Settings, Using An Intervention-Standardised Unit Cost Typology.

BACKGROUND: There is a need for easily accessible tuberculosis unit cost data, as well as an understanding of the variability of methods used and reporting standards of that data. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to descriptively review papers reporting tuberculosis unit costs from a healthcare provider perspective looking at methodological variation; to assess quality using a study quality rating system and machine learning to investigate the indicators of reporting quality; and to identify the data gaps to inform standardised tuberculosis unit cost collection and consistent principles for reporting going forward. METHODS: We searched grey and published literature in five sources and eight databases, respectively, using search terms linked to cost, tuberculosis and tuberculosis health services including tuberculosis treatment and prevention. For inclusion, the papers needed to contain empirical unit cost estimates for tuberculosis interventions from low- and middle-income countries, with reference years between 1990 and 2018. A total of 21,691 papers were found and screened in a phased manner. Data were extracted from the eligible papers into a detailed Microsoft Excel tool, extensively cleaned and analysed with R software (R Project, Vienna, Austria) using the user interface of RStudio. A study quality rating was applied to the reviewed papers based on the inclusion or omission of a selection of variables and their relative importance. Following this, machine learning using a recursive partitioning method was utilised to construct a classification tree to assess the reporting quality. RESULTS: This systematic review included 103 provider perspective papers with 627 unit costs (costs not presented here) for tuberculosis interventions among a total of 140 variables. The interventions covered were active, passive and intensified case finding; tuberculosis treatment; above-service costs; and tuberculosis prevention. Passive case finding is the detection of tuberculosis cases where individuals self-identify at health facilities; active case finding is detection of cases of those not in health facilities, such as through outreach; and intensified case finding is detection of cases in high-risk populations. There was heterogeneity in some of the reported methods used such cost allocation, amortisation and the use of top-down, bottom-up or mixed approaches to the costing. Uncertainty checking through sensitivity analysis was only reported on by half of the papers (54%), while purposive and convenience sampling was reported by 72% of papers. Machine learning indicated that reporting on 'Intervention' (in particular), 'Urbanicity' and 'Site Sampling', were the most likely indicators of quality of reporting. The largest data gap identified was for tuberculosis vaccination cost data, the Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccine in particular. There is a gap in available unit costs for 12 of 30 high tuberculosis burden countries, as well as for the interventions of above-service costs, tuberculosis prevention, and active and intensified case finding. CONCLUSION: Variability in the methods and reporting used makes comparison difficult and makes it hard for decision makers to know which unit costs they can trust. The study quality rating system used in this review as well as the classification tree enable focus on specific reporting aspects that should improve variability and increase confidence in unit costs. Researchers should endeavour to be explicit and transparent in how they cost interventions following the principles as laid out in the Global Health Cost Consortium's Reference Case for Estimating the Costs of Global Health Services and Interventions, which in turn will lead to repeatability, comparability and enhanced learning from others.

Tracking total spending on tuberculosis by source and function in 135 low-income and middle-income countries, 2000-17: a financial modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Estimates of government spending and development assistance for tuberculosis exist, but less is known about out-of-pocket and prepaid private spending. We aimed to provide comprehensive estimates of total spending on tuberculosis in low-income and middle-income countries for 2000-17. METHODS: We extracted data on tuberculosis spending, unit costs, and health-care use from the WHO global tuberculosis database, Global Fund proposals and reports, National Health Accounts, the WHO-Choosing Interventions that are Cost-Effective project database, and the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation Development Assistance for Health Database. We extracted data from at least one of these sources for all 135 low-income and middle-income countries using the World Bank 2019 definitions. We estimated tuberculosis spending by source and function for notified (officially reported) and non-notified tuberculosis cases separately and combined, using spatiotemporal Gaussian process regression to fill in for missing data and estimate uncertainty. We aggregated estimates of government, out-of-pocket, prepaid private, and development assistance spending on tuberculosis to estimate total spending in 2019 US$. FINDINGS: Total spending on tuberculosis in 135 low-income and middle-income countries increased annually by 3·9% (95% CI 3·0 to 4·6), from $5·7 billion (5·2 to 6·5) in 2000 to $10·9 billion (10·3 to 11·8) in 2017. Government spending increased annually by 5·1% (4·4 to 5·7) between 2000 and 2017, and reached $6·9 billion (6·5 to 7·5) or 63·5% (59·2 to 66·8) of all tuberculosis spending in 2017. Of government spending, $5·8 billion (5·6 to 6·1) was spent on notified cases. Out-of-pocket spending decreased annually by 0·8% (-2·9 to 1·3), from $2·4 billion (1·9 to 3·1) in 2000 to $2·1 billion (1·6 to 2·7) in 2017. Development assistance for country-specific spending on tuberculosis increased from $54·6 million in 2000 to $1·1 billion in 2017. Administrative costs and development assistance for global projects related to tuberculosis care increased from $85·3 million in 2000 to $576·2 million in 2017. 30 high tuberculosis burden countries of low and middle income accounted for 73·7% (71·8-75·8) of tuberculosis spending in 2017. INTERPRETATION: Despite substantial increases since 2000, funding for tuberculosis is still far short of global financing targets and out-of-pocket spending remains high in resource-constrained countries, posing a barrier to patient's access to care and treatment adherence. Of the 30 countries with a high-burden of tuberculosis, just over half were primarily funded by government, while others, especially lower-middle-income and low-income countries, were still primarily dependent on development assistance for tuberculosis or out-of-pocket health spending. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.