A cost-effectiveness analysis of a South African pregnancy support grant.

Poverty among expectant mothers often results in sub-optimal maternal nutrition and inadequate antenatal care, with negative consequences on child health outcomes. South Africa has a child support grant that is available from birth to those in need. This study aims to determine whether a pregnancy support grant, administered through the extension of the child support grant, would be cost-effective compared to the existing child support grant alone. A cost-utility analysis was performed using a decision-tree model to predict the incremental costs (ZAR) and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted by the pregnancy support grant over a 2-year time horizon. An ingredients-based approach to costing was completed from a governmental perspective. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. The intervention resulted in a cost saving of R13.8 billion ($930 million, 95% CI: ZAR3.91 billion - ZAR23.2 billion/ $1.57 billion - $264 million) and averted 59,000 DALYs (95% CI: -6,400-110,000), indicating that the intervention is highly cost-effective. The primary cost driver was low birthweight requiring neonatal intensive care, with a disaggregated incremental cost of R31,800 ($2,149) per pregnancy. Mortality contributed most significantly to the DALYs accrued in the comparator (0.68 DALYs). The intervention remained the dominant strategy in the sensitivity analyses. The pregnancy support grant is a highly cost-effective solution for supporting expecting mothers and ensuring healthy pregnancies. With its positive impact on child health outcomes, there is a clear imperative for government to implement this grant. By investing in this program, cost savings could be leveraged. The implementation of this grant should be given high priority in public health and social policies.

Indirect effects of COVID-19 on maternal and child health in South Africa.

BACKGROUND: The unfinished burden of poor maternal and child health contributes to the quadruple burden of disease in South Africa with the direct and indirect effects of the COVID-19 pandemic yet to be fully documented. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the indirect effects of COVID-19 on maternal and child health in different geographical regions and relative wealth quintiles. METHODS: We estimated the effects of COVID-19 on maternal and child health from April 2020 to June 2021. We estimated this by calculating mean changes across facilities, relative wealth index (RWI) quintiles, geographical areas and provinces. To account for confounding by underlying seasonal or linear trends, we subsequently fitted a segmented fixed effect panel model. RESULTS: A total of 4956 public sector facilities were included in the analysis. Between April and September 2020, full immunisation and first dose of measles declined by 6.99% and 2.44%, respectively. In the follow-up months, measles first dose increased by 4.88% while full immunisation remained negative (-0.65%) especially in poorer quintiles. At facility level, the mean change in incidence and mortality due to pneumonia, diarrhoea and severe acute malnutrition was negative. Change in first antenatal visits, delivery by 15-19-year olds, delivery by C-section and maternal mortality was positive but not significant. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 disrupted utilisation of child health services. While reduction in child health services at the start of the pandemic was followed by an increase in subsequent months, the recovery was not uniform across different quintiles and geographical areas. This study highlights the disproportionate impact of the pandemic and the need for targeted interventions to improve utilisation of health services.

Costs of seasonal influenza vaccination in South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Influenza accounts for a substantial number of deaths and hospitalisations annually in South Africa. To address this disease burden, the South African National Department of Health introduced a trivalent inactivated influenza vaccination programme in 2010. METHODS: We adapted and populated the WHO Seasonal Influenza Immunization Costing Tool (WHO SIICT) with country-specific data to estimate the cost of the influenza vaccination programme in South Africa. Data were obtained through key-informant interviews at different levels of the health system and through a review of existing secondary data sources. Costs were estimated from a public provider perspective and expressed in 2018 prices. We conducted scenario analyses to assess the impact of different levels of programme expansion and the use of quadrivalent vaccines on total programme costs. RESULTS: Total financial and economic costs were estimated at approximately USD 2.93 million and USD 7.91 million, respectively, while financial and economic cost per person immunised was estimated at USD 3.29 and USD 8.88, respectively. Expanding the programme by 5% and 10% increased economic cost per person immunised to USD 9.36 and USD 9.52 in the two scenarios, respectively. Finally, replacing trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) with quadrivalent vaccine increased financial and economic costs to USD 4.89 and USD 10.48 per person immunised, respectively. CONCLUSION: We adapted the WHO SIICT and provide estimates of the total costs of the seasonal influenza vaccination programme in South Africa. These estimates provide a basis for planning future programme expansion and may serve as inputs for cost-effectiveness analyses of seasonal influenza vaccination programmes.

Inpatient Care Costs of COVID-19 in South Africa's Public Healthcare System.

BACKGROUND: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has had a devastating impact globally, with severe health and economic consequences. To prepare health systems to deal with the pandemic, epidemiological and cost projection models are required to inform budgets and efficient allocation of resources. This study estimates daily inpatient care costs of COVID-19 in South Africa, an important input into cost projection and economic evaluation models. METHODS: We adopted a micro-costing approach, which involved the identification, measurement and valuation of resources used in the clinical management of COVID-19. We considered only direct medical costs for an episode of hospitalisation from the South African public health system perspective. Resource quantities and unit costs were obtained from various sources. Inpatient costs per patient day was estimated for consumables, capital equipment and human resources for three levels of inpatient care - general wards, high care wards and intensive care units (ICUs). RESULTS: Average daily costs per patient increased with the level of care. The highest average daily cost was estimated for ICU admissions - 271 USD to 306 USD (financial costs) and ~800 USD to 830 USD (economic costs, excluding facility fee) depending on the need for invasive vs. non-invasive ventilation (NIV). Conversely, the lowest cost was estimated for general ward-based care - 62 USD to 79 USD (financial costs) and 119 USD to 278 USD (economic costs, excluding facility fees) depending on the need for supplemental oxygen. In high care wards, total cost was estimated at 156 USD, financial costs and 277 USD, economic costs (excluding facility fees). Probabilistic sensitivity analyses suggest our costs estimates are robust to uncertainty in cost inputs. CONCLUSION: Our estimates of inpatient costs are useful for informing budgeting and planning processes and cost-effectiveness analysis in the South African context. However, these estimates can be adapted to inform policy decisions in other context.