Cost of SARS-CoV-2 self-test distribution programmes by different modalities: a micro-costing study in five countries (Brazil, Georgia, Malaysia, Ethiopia and the Philippines).

OBJECTIVE: Diagnostic testing is an important tool to combat the COVID-19 pandemic, yet access to and uptake of testing vary widely 3 years into the pandemic. The WHO recommends the use of COVID-19 self-testing as an option to help expand testing access. We aimed to calculate the cost of providing COVID-19 self-testing across countries and distribution modalities. DESIGN: We estimated economic costs from the provider perspective to calculate the total cost and the cost per self-test kit distributed for three scenarios that differed by costing period (pilot, annual), the number of tests distributed (actual, planned, scaled assuming an epidemic peak) and self-test kit costs (pilot purchase price, 50% reduction). SETTING: We used data collected between August and December 2022 in Brazil, Georgia, Malaysia, Ethiopia and the Philippines from pilot implementation studies designed to provide COVID-19 self-tests in a variety of settings-namely, workplace and healthcare facilities. RESULTS: Across all five countries, 173 000 kits were distributed during pilot implementation with the cost/test distributed ranging from $2.44 to $12.78. The cost/self-test kit distributed was lowest in the scenario that assumed implementation over a longer period (year), with higher test demand (peak) and a test kit price reduction of 50% ($1.04-3.07). Across all countries and scenarios, test procurement occupied the greatest proportion of costs: 58-87% for countries with off-site self-testing (outside the workplace, for example, home) and 15-50% for countries with on-site self-testing (at the workplace). Staffing was the next key cost driver, particularly for distribution modalities that had on-site self-testing (29-35%) versus off-site self-testing (7-27%). CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that it is likely to cost between $2.44 and $12.78 per test to distribute COVID-19 self-tests across common settings in five heterogeneous countries. Cost-effectiveness analyses using these results will allow policymakers to make informed decisions on optimally scaling up COVID-19 self-test distribution programmes across diverse settings and evolving needs.

Satisfaction with service delivery among HIV treatment clients enrolled in differentiated and conventional models of care in South Africa: a baseline survey.

INTRODUCTION: Differentiated service delivery (DSD) models aim to increase the responsiveness of HIV treatment programmes to the individual needs of antiretroviral therapy (ART) clients to improve treatment outcomes and quality of life. Little is known about how DSD client experiences differ from conventional care. METHODS: From May to November 2021, we interviewed adult (≥18) ART clients at 21 primary clinics in four districts of South Africa. Participants were enrolled consecutively at routine visits and stratified into four groups: conventional care-not eligible for DSD (conventional-not-eligible); conventional care eligible for but not enrolled in DSD (conventional-not-enrolled); facility pickup point DSD model; and external pickup point DSD model. Satisfaction was assessed using questions with 5-point Likert-scale responses. Mean scores were categorized as not satisfied (score ≤3) or satisfied (>3). We used logistic regression to assess differences and report crude and adjusted odds ratios (aORs). Qualitative themes were identified through content analysis. RESULTS: Eight hundred and sixty-seven participants (70% female, median age 39) were surveyed: 24% facility pick-up points; 27% external pick-up points; 25% conventional-not-eligible; and 24% conventional-not-enrolled. Seventy-four percent of all study participants expressed satisfaction with their HIV care. Those enrolled in DSD models were more likely to be satisfied, with an aOR of 6.24 (95% CI [3.18-12.24]) for external pick-up point versus conventional-not-eligible and an aOR of 3.30 (1.95-5.58) for facility pick-up point versus conventional-not-eligible. Conventional-not-enrolled clients were slightly but not significantly more satisfied than conventional-not-eligible clients (1.29, 0.85-1.96). Those seeking outside healthcare (crude OR 0.57, 0.41-0.81) or reporting more annual clinic visits (0.52, 0.29-0.93) were less likely to be satisfied. Conventional care participants reporting satisfaction with their current model of care perceived providers as helpful, respectful, and friendly and were satisfied with care despite long queues. DSD model participants emphasized ease and convenience, particularly not having to queue. CONCLUSIONS: Most adult ART clients in South Africa were satisfied with their care, but those enrolled in DSD models expressed slightly greater satisfaction than those remaining in conventional care. Efforts should focus on enrolling more eligible patients into DSD models, expanding eligibility criteria to cover a wider client base, and further improving the models' desirable characteristics.

Impact and cost-effectiveness of SARS-CoV-2 self-testing strategies in schools: a multicountry modelling analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the most epidemiologically effective and cost-effective school-based SARS-CoV-2 antigen-detection rapid diagnostic test (Ag-RDT) self-testing strategies among teachers and students. DESIGN: Mathematical modelling and economic evaluation. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Simulated school and community populations were parameterised to Brazil, Georgia and Zambia, with SARS-CoV-2 self-testing strategies targeted to teachers and students in primary and secondary schools under varying epidemic conditions. INTERVENTIONS: SARS-CoV-2 Ag-RDT self-testing strategies for only teachers or teachers and students-only symptomatically or symptomatically and asymptomatically at 5%, 10%, 40% or 100% of schools at varying frequencies. OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes were assessed in terms of total infections and symptomatic days among teachers and students, as well as total infections and deaths within the community under the intervention compared with baseline. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for infections prevented among teachers and students. RESULTS: With respect to both the reduction in infections and total cost, symptomatic testing of all teachers and students appears to be the most cost-effective strategy. Symptomatic testing can prevent up to 69·3%, 64·5% and 75·5% of school infections in Brazil, Georgia and Zambia, respectively, depending on the epidemic conditions, with additional reductions in community infections. ICERs for symptomatic testing range from US$2 to US$19 per additional school infection averted as compared with symptomatic testing of teachers alone. CONCLUSIONS: Symptomatic testing of teachers and students has the potential to cost-effectively reduce a substantial number of school and community infections.

The SENTINEL study of differentiated service delivery models for HIV treatment in Malawi, South Africa, and Zambia: research protocol for a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Many countries in sub-Saharan Africa are rapidly scaling up "differentiated service delivery" (DSD) models for HIV treatment to improve the quality of care, increase access, reduce costs, and support the continued expansion and sustainability of antiretroviral therapy (ART) programs. Although there is some published evidence about the health outcomes of patients in DSD models, little is known about their impacts on healthcare providers' job satisfaction, patients' quality of life, costs to providers or patients, or how DSD models affect resource allocation at the facility level. METHODS: SENTINEL is a multi-year observational study that will collect detailed data about DSD models for ART delivery and related services from 12 healthcare facilities in Malawi, 24 in South Africa, and 12 in Zambia. The first round of SENTINEL included a patient survey, provider survey, provider time-and-motion observations, and facility resource use inventory. A survey of clients testing for HIV and a supplement to the facility resource use component to describe service delivery integration will be added for the second round. The patient survey will ask up to 10 patients enrolled in each DSD model at each study site about their experiences in HIV care and in DSD models, costs incurred seeking treatment, and preferences for HIV service delivery. The provider survey will ask up to 10 providers per site about the impact of DSD models on their positions and clinics. The time-and-motion component will directly observe the time use of a sample of providers implementing DSD models. Finally, the resource utilization component will collect facility-level data about DSD model availability and enrollment and the human and other resources needed to implement them. SENTINEL is planned to include four or more approximately annual rounds of data collection between 2021 and 2026. DISCUSSION: As national DSD programs for HIV treatment mature, it is important to understand how individual healthcare facilities are interpreting and implementing national guidelines and how healthcare workers and clients are adapting to new models of service delivery. SENTINEL will help policy makers and program managers understand the benefits and costs of differentiated service delivery and improve resource allocation going forward.

The costs of interventions for type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension and cardiovascular disease in South Africa - a systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: In the context of a move to universal health coverage, three separate systematic reviews were conducted to summarise available evidence on the direct costs of interventions for type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease in South Africa. METHODS: PubMed® and Web of Science was searched for literature published between 01 and 1995 and 27 October 2022. Additionally, reference and citations lists of retrieved articles and experts were consulted. We also tracked reference lists of previous, related systematic reviews. Eligible publications were cost analyses of clinical interventions targeted at adults age 15 + reporting primary estimates of in- and out-of-hospital costs from a provider perspective. Costs were extracted and converted to 2021 US dollars, and article methodological and reporting quality was appraised using the 2013 CHEERS checklist. RESULTS: Of the 600, 1,172 and 1,466 identified publications for type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease, respectively, 10, 12, and 17 met full inclusion criteria. 60% of articles reported cardiovascular disease costs, 52% were of good reporting quality, and 10%, 50%, and 39% of type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension and cardiovascular disease papers reported private-sector costs only. Hypertension drug costs ranged from $2 to $85 per person-month, while type 2 diabetes mellitus drug costs ranged between $57 and $630 per person-year (ppy). Diabetes-related complication treatment costs ranged from $55 for retinopathy treatment to $25,193 ppy for haemodialysis, while cardiovascular disease treatment costs were between $160 and $37,491 ppy. Drugs and treatment of complications were major cost drivers for hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus, while hospitalisation drove cardiovascular disease costs. CONCLUSION: The intervention costs of type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension and cardiovascular disease care have received more attention recently, particularly diabetes-related complications and cardiovascular disease. However, 39% of identified cardiovascular disease treatment costs used a private sector perspective, leaving significant research gaps in the public sector and the cheaper to treat hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus. This review fills an information gap regarding the intervention costs of these diseases in South Africa.

Economic evaluation of differentiated service delivery models for HIV treatment in Lesotho: costs to providers and patients.

INTRODUCTION: Lesotho, the country with the second-highest HIV/AIDS prevalence (23.6%) in the world, has made considerable progress towards achieving the "95-95-95" UNAIDS targets, but recent success in improving treatment access to all known HIV positive individuals has severely strained existing healthcare infrastructure, financial and human resources. Lesotho also faces the challenge of a largely rural population who incur a significant time and financial burden to visit healthcare facilities. Using data from a cluster-randomized non-inferiority trial conducted between August 2017 and July 2019, we evaluated costs to providers and costs to patients of community-based differentiated models of multi-month delivery of antiretroviral therapy (ART) in Lesotho. METHODS: The trial of multi-month dispensing compared 12-month retention in care among three arms: conventional care, which required quarterly facility visits and ART dispensation (3MF); three-month community adherence groups (CAGs) (3MC) and six-month community ART distribution (6MCD). We first estimated the average total annual cost of providing HIV care and treatment followed by the total cost per patient retained 12 months after entry for each arm, using resource utilization data from the trial and local unit costs. We then estimated the average annual cost to patients in each arm with self-reported questionnaire data. RESULTS: The average total annual cost of providing HIV care and treatment per patient was the highest in the 3MF arm ($122.28, standard deviation [SD] $23.91), followed by 3MC ($114.20, SD $23.03) and the 6MCD arm ($112.58, SD $21.44). Per patient retained in care, the average provider cost was $125.99 (SD $24.64) in the 3MF arm and 6% to 8% less for the other two arms ($118.38, SD $23.87 and $118.83, SD $22.63 for the 3MC and 6MCD respectively). There was a large reduction in patient costs for both differentiated service delivery arms: from $44.42 (SD $12.06) annually in the 3MF arm to $16.34 (SD $5.11) annually in the 3MC (63% reduction) and $18.77 (SD $8.31) annually in 6MCD arm (58% reduction). CONCLUSIONS: Community-based, multi-month models of ART in Lesotho are likely to produce small cost savings to treatment providers and large savings to patients in Lesotho. Patient cost savings may support long-term adherence and retention in care.