ABSTRACT
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.
ABSTRACT
Objectives: The aim of this study was to describe the pattern of admissions during the fourth wave of COVID-19 in order to inform future public health policies. Methods: This was a retrospective descriptive study of an early cohort of all adult patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection admitted to a tertiary hospital in Cape Town, South Africa, at the start of the country's fourth wave. This was compared with an early cohort from the first wave at the same institution. Results: In total, 121 SARS-CoV-2-positive admissions from the fourth wave were included. Thirty-one (25.6%) patients had COVID-19 pneumonia, while 90 (74.4%) had incidental SARS-CoV-2 infection. (In the first wave all 116 patients had COVID-19 pneumonia.) Thirty-two (26.4%) patients self-reported complete or partial COVID-19 vaccination, of whom 12 (37.5%) were admitted with COVID-19 pneumonia. Compared with the first wave, there were fewer intensive- or high-care admissions (18/121 [14.9%] vs 42/116 [36.2%]; p < 0.001) and mortality was lower (12/121 [9.9%] vs 31/116 [26.7%]; p = 0.001). Conclusion: Admissions to the COVID-19 wards during the fourth wave primarily included patients with incidental SARS-CoV-2 infection. There was a reduction in the need for critical care and in-hospital mortality. This changing epidemiology of COVID-19 admissions may be attributed to a combination of natural and/or vaccination-acquired immunity.
