Multiple micronutrient supplementation cost-benefit tool for informing maternal nutrition policy and investment decisions.

Antenatal multiple micronutrient supplementation (MMS) is an intervention that can help reach three of the six global nutrition targets, either directly or indirectly: a reduction in low birth weight, stunting, and anaemia in women of reproductive age. To support global guideline development and national decision-making on investments into maternal nutrition, Nutrition International developed a modelling tool called the MMS cost-benefit tool to help users understand whether antenatal MMS is better value for money than iron and folic acid supplementation (IFAS) during pregnancy. The MMS cost-benefit tool can generate estimates on the potential health impact, budget impact, economic value, cost-effectiveness and benefit-cost ratio of investing in MMS compared to IFAS in LMICs. In the 33 countries with data included in the tool, the MMS cost-benefit tool shows that transitioning is expected to generate substantial health benefits in terms of morbidity and mortality averted and can be very cost-effective in multiple scenarios for these countries. The cost per DALY averted averages at US$ 23.61 and benefit-cost ratio ranges from US$ 41-US$ 1304: $1.0, which suggest MMS is good value for money compared with IFAS. With its user-friendly design, open access availability, and online data-driven analytics, the MMS cost-benefit tool can be a powerful resource for governments and nutrition partners seeking timely and evidence-based analyses to inform policy-decision and investments towards the scale-up of MMS for pregnant women globally.

Reducing the Burden of Anemia and Neural Tube Defects in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: An Analysis to Identify Countries with an Immediate Potential to Benefit from Large-Scale Mandatory Fortification of Wheat Flour and Rice.

Using a predetermined set of criteria, including burden of anemia and neural tube defects (NTDs) and an enabling environment for large-scale fortification, this paper identifies 18 low- and middle-income countries with the highest and most immediate potential for large-scale wheat flour and/or rice fortification in terms of health impact and economic benefit. Adequately fortified staples, delivered at estimated coverage rates in these countries, have the potential to avert 72.1 million cases of anemia among non-pregnant women of reproductive age; 51,636 live births associated with folic acid-preventable NTDs (i.e., spina bifida, anencephaly); and 46,378 child deaths associated with NTDs annually. This equates to a 34% reduction in the number of cases of anemia and 38% reduction in the number of NTDs in the 18 countries identified. An estimated 5.4 million disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) could be averted annually, and an economic value of 31.8 billion United States dollars (USD) generated from 1 year of fortification at scale in women and children beneficiaries. This paper presents a missed opportunity and warrants an urgent call to action for the countries identified to potentially avert a significant number of preventable birth defects, anemia, and under-five child mortality and move closer to achieving health equity by 2030 for the Sustainable Development Goals.

The financing need for expanded maternity protection in Indonesia.

Background: Almost half of all Indonesian children under 6 months of age were not exclusive breastfed in 2017. Optimizing maternity protection programs may result in increased breastfeeding rates. This study aims to: estimate the potential cost implications of optimizing the current paid maternity protection program, estimate budgets needed to increase coverage of lactation rooms in mid and large firms, and explore challenges in its implementation in Indonesia. Methods: The potential cost implication of the current and increased maternity leave length (three and 6 months) as well as the potential budget impact to the government were estimated for 2020 to 2030. The cost of setting up lactation rooms in formal sector companies was estimated using the Alive & Thrive standards. Interviews were conducted in five different provinces to 29 respondents in 2016 to identify current and potential challenges in implementing both existing and improved maternity protection policies. Results: The costs of expanding paid maternity leave from three to 6 months and incorporating standardized lactation rooms in 80% of medium and large size firms in Indonesia was estimated at US$1.0 billion (US$616.4/mother per year) from 2020 to 2030, covering roughly 1.7 million females. The cost of setting up a basic lactation room in 80% of medium and large companies may reach US$18.1 million over 10 years. The three main barriers to increasing breastfeeding rates were: breastmilk substitutes marketing practices, the lack of lactation rooms in workplaces, and local customs that may hamper breastfeeding according to recommendations. Conclusions: The cost of expanding paid maternity leave is lower than the potential cost savings of US$ 1.5 billion from decreased child mortality and morbidity, maternal cancer rates and cognitive loss. Sharing the cost of paid maternity leave between government and the private sector may provide a feasible economic solution. The main barriers to increasing breastfeeding need to be overcome to reap the benefits of recommended breastfeeding practices.

The cost of not breastfeeding: global results from a new tool.

Evidence shows that breastfeeding has many health, human capital and future economic benefits for young children, their mothers and countries. The new Cost of Not Breastfeeding tool, based on open access data, was developed to help policy-makers and advocates have information on the estimated human and economic costs of not breastfeeding at the country, regional and global levels. The results of the analysis using the tool show that 595 379 childhood deaths (6 to 59 months) from diarrhoea and pneumonia each year can be attributed to not breastfeeding according to global recommendations from WHO and UNICEF. It also estimates that 974 956 cases of childhood obesity can be attributed to not breastfeeding according to recommendations each year. For women, breastfeeding is estimated to have the potential to prevent 98 243 deaths from breast and ovarian cancers as well as type II diabetes each year. This level of avoidable morbidity and mortality translates into global health system treatment costs of US$1.1 billion annually. The economic losses of premature child and women's mortality are estimated to equal US$53.7 billion in future lost earnings each year. The largest component of economic losses, however, is the cognitive losses, which are estimated to equal US$285.4 billion annually. Aggregating these costs, the total global economic losses are estimated to be US$341.3 billion, or 0.70% of global gross national income. While the aim of the tool is to capture the majority of the costs, the estimates are likely to be conservative since economic costs of increased household caregiving time (mainly borne by women), and treatment costs related to other diseases attributable to not breastfeeding according to recommendations are not included in the analysis. This study illustrates the substantial costs of not breastfeeding, and potential economic benefits that could be generated by government and development partners' investments in scaling up effective breastfeeding promotion and support strategies.

Cost-effectiveness of sunflower oil fortification with vitamin A in Tanzania by scale.

In 2011, Tanzania mandated the fortification of edible oil with vitamin A to help address its vitamin A deficiency (VAD) public health problem. By 2015, only 16% of edible oil met the standards for adequate fortification. There is no evidence on the cost-effectiveness of the fortification of edible oil by small- and medium-scale (SMS) producers in preventing VAD. The MASAVA project initiated the production of sunflower oil fortified with vitamin A by SMS producers in the Manyara and Shinyanga regions of Tanzania. A quasi-experimental nonequivalent control-group research trial and an economic evaluation were conducted. The household survey included mother and child pairs from a sample of 568 households before the intervention and 18 months later. From the social perspective, the incremental cost of fortification of sunflower oil could be as low as $0.13, $0.06, and $0.02 per litre for small-, medium-, and large-scale producers, respectively, compared with unfortified sunflower oil. The SMS intervention increased access to fortified oil for some vulnerable groups but did not have a significant effect on the prevention of VAD due to insufficient coverage. Fortification of vegetable oil by large-scale producers was associated with a significant reduction of VAD in children from Shinyanga. The estimated cost per disability-adjusted life year averted for fortified sunflower oil was $281 for large-scale and could be as low as $626 for medium-scale and $1,507 for small-scale producers under ideal conditions. According to the World Health Organization thresholds, this intervention is very cost-effective for large- and medium-scale producers and cost-effective for small-scale producers.

The annual cost of not breastfeeding in Indonesia: the economic burden of treating diarrhea and respiratory disease among children (< 24mo) due to not breastfeeding according to recommendation.

BACKGROUND: In Indonesia, 96% of children (< 24mo) are breastfed. However, only 42% of children (< 6mo) are exclusively breastfed, as per World Health Organization recommendations. Breastfeeding provides protective benefits such as reducing the risk of morbidity and mortality associated with diarrhea and pneumonia/respiratory disease (PRD). This study estimates the potential economic impact of not breastfeeding according to recommendation in Indonesia based on infants suffering from attributable diarrhea and PRD. METHODS: A cost analysis examined both the healthcare system costs and non-medical costs for children (< 24mo) with diarrhea and PRD. Data collection took place between 2015 and 2016 and healthcare expenditures were assessed in 13 facilities, in five sites including Bandung and Tomohon City. Costs from a provider perspective were estimated using healthcare records and 26 interviews with healthcare workers. A discount rate of 3% was used. A cross-sectional survey with caregiver-child pairs (n = 615) collected data related to out of pocket costs such transportation and opportunity costs such as wage loss. These figures were combined with the national disease prevalence rates from Indonesia Demographic and Health Survey 2012, and the relative risk of disease of not breastfeeding according to recommendation from literatures to extrapolate the financial burden of treatment. RESULTS: The healthcare system cost due to not breastfeeding according to recommendation was estimated at US$118 million annually. The mean healthcare system cost and out of pocket costs was US$11.37 and US$3.85 respectively. This cost consists of US$88.64 million of provider costs and US$29.98 million of non-medical patient costs. CONCLUSIONS: The cost of not breastfeeding according to recommendation is potentially high, therefore the Indonesian government needs to invest in breastfeeding protection, promotion and support as the potential healthcare system cost savings are significant. As suggested by other studies, the long term cost due to cognitive losses of providing not breastfeeding according to recommendation should also be taken into account to provide a complete understanding of the economic impact of not breastfeeding according to recommendation.

Promoting equitable global health research: a policy analysis of the Canadian funding landscape.

BACKGROUND: Recognising radical shifts in the global health research (GHR) environment, participants in a 2013 deliberative dialogue called for careful consideration of equity-centred principles that should inform Canadian funding polices. This study examined the existing funding structures and policies of Canadian and international funders to inform the future design of a responsive GHR funding landscape. METHODS: We used a three-pronged analytical framework to review the ideas, interests and institutions implicated in publically accessible documents relevant to GHR funding. These data included published literature and organisational documents (e.g. strategic plans, progress reports, granting policies) from Canadian and other comparator funders. We then used a deliberative approach to develop recommendations with the research team, advisors, industry informants and low- and middle-income country (LMIC) partners. RESULTS: In Canada, major GHR funders invest an estimated CA$90 M per annum; however, the post-2008 re-organization of funding structures and policies resulted in an uncoordinated and inefficient Canadian strategy. Australia, Denmark, the European Union, Norway, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States of America invest proportionately more in GHR than Canada. Each of these countries has a national strategic plan for global health, some of which have dedicated benchmarks for GHR funding and policy to allow funds to be held by partners outside of Canada. Key constraints to equitable GHR funding included (1) funding policies that restrict financial and cost burden aspects of partnering for GHR in LMICs; and (2) challenges associated with the development of effective governance mechanisms. There were, however, some Canadian innovations in funding research that demonstrated both unconventional and equitable approaches to supporting GHR in Canada and abroad. Among the most promising were found in the International Development Research Centre and the (no longer active) Global Health Research Initiative. CONCLUSION: Promoting equitable GHR funding policies and practices in Canada requires cooperation and actions by multiple stakeholders, including government, funding agencies, academic institutions and researchers. Greater cooperation and collaboration among these stakeholders in the context of recent political shifts present important opportunities for advancing funding policies that enable and encourage more equitable investments in GHR.

Reaching the Global Target to Increase Exclusive Breastfeeding: How Much Will It Cost and How Can We Pay for It?

There is an urgent need for global action to increase the rates of exclusive breastfeeding. In 2012, the World Health Assembly (WHA) set a global target to increase the rate of exclusive breastfeeding in the first 6 months up to at least 50% by 2025. However, current investment levels are insufficient to drive the kind of progress that is needed to meet the target. Reaching the global nutrition target of increasing exclusive breastfeeding to 50% will require an average annual investment of $570 million over 10 years in addition to what is currently being spent. This investment is projected to result in an additional 105 million children being exclusively breastfed and at least 520,000 child deaths prevented over the next 10 years. This analysis was part of an investment framework developed by the World Bank, Results for Development Institute, and 1,000 Days to provide policy makers with a roadmap for how to reach four of the six WHA global nutrition targets: decreasing childhood stunting, decreasing childhood wasting, decreasing rates of anemia in women of reproductive age, and increasing exclusive breastfeeding in the first 6 months.

The cost of not breastfeeding in Southeast Asia.

Rates of exclusive breastfeeding are slowly increasing, but remain suboptimal globally despite the health and economic benefits. This study estimates the costs of not breastfeeding across seven countries in Southeast Asia and presents a cost-benefit analysis of a modeled comprehensive breastfeeding strategy in Viet Nam, based on a large programme. There have been very few such studies previously for low- and middle-income countries. The estimates used published data on disease prevalence and breastfeeding patterns for the seven countries, supplemented by information on healthcare costs from representative institutions. Modelling of costs of not breastfeeding used estimated effects obtained from systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Modelling of cost-benefit for Viet Nam used programme data on costs combined with effects from a large-scale cluster randomized breastfeeding promotion intervention with controls. This study found that over 12 400 preventable child and maternal deaths per year in the seven countries could be attributed to inadequate breastfeeding. The economic benefits associated with potential improvements in cognition alone, through higher IQ and earnings, total $1.6 billion annually. The loss exceeds 0.5% of Gross National Income in the country with the lowest exclusive breastfeeding rate (Thailand). The potential savings in health care treatment costs ($0.3 billion annually) from reducing the incidence of diarrhoea and pneumonia could help offset the cost of breastfeeding promotion. Based on the data available and authors' assumptions, investing in a national breastfeeding promotion strategy in Viet Nam could result in preventing 200 child deaths per year and generate monetary benefits of US$2.39 for every US$1, or a 139% return on investment. These encouraging results suggest that there are feasible and affordable opportunities to accelerate progress towards achieving the Global Nutrition Target for exclusive breastfeeding by 2025.

A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Low-Risk Deliveries: A Comparison of Midwives, Family Physicians and Obstetricians.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of in-hospital obstetrical care by obstetricians (OBs), family physicians (FPs) and midwives (MWs) for delivery of low-risk obstetrical patients. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness analysis from the Ministry of Health perspective using a retrospective cohort study. The time horizon was from hospital admission of a low-risk pregnant patient to the discharge of the mother and infant. Costing data included human resource, intervention and hospital case-mix costs. Interventions measured were induction or augmentation of labour with oxytocin, epidural use, forceps or vacuum delivery and caesarean section. The outcome measured was avoidance of transfer to a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Model results were tested using various types of sensitivity analyses. FINDINGS: The mean maternal age by provider groups was 29.7 for OBs, 29.8 for FPs and 31.2 for MWs - a statistically higher mean for the MW group. The MW deliveries had lower costs and better outcomes than FPs and OBs. FPs also dominated OB.s The differences in cost per delivery were small, but slightly lower in MW ($5,102) and FP ($5,116) than in OB ($5,188). Avoidance of transfer to an NICU was highest for MW at 94.0% (95% CI: 91.0-97.0), compared with 90.2% for FP (95% CI: 88.2-92.2) and 89.6% for OB (95% CI: 88.6-90.6). The cost-effectiveness of the MW group is diminished by increases in compensation, and the cost-effectiveness of the FP group is sensitive to changes in intervention rates and costs. CONCLUSIONS: The MW strategy was the most cost-effective in this hospital setting. Given data limitations to further examine patient characteristics between groups, the overall conservative findings of this study support investments and better integration for MWs in the current system.