Cost and cost-effectiveness analysis of mass drug administration compared to school-based targeted preventive chemotherapy for hookworm control in Dak Lak province, Vietnam.

Background: School-based targeted preventive chemotherapy (PC), the main strategy for soil-transmitted helminths (STH) control, excludes other at-risk populations including adults and preschool children. Mass drug administration (MDA), covering all age groups, would bring additional health benefits but also requires greater investment. This cost survey and cost-effectiveness analysis compared MDA with school-based targeted PC for STH control in Dak Lak, Vietnam, where STH are endemic. Methods: A cost survey was conducted in 2020 to estimate the total and per person economic and financial cost of each strategy. Monte Carlo simulation accounted for uncertainty in cost estimates. The primary effectiveness measure was hookworm-related disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted, and secondary measures were hookworm infection-years averted and moderate-to-heavy intensity hookworm infection-years averted. A Markov model was used to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of MDA compared to school-based targeted PC using a government payer perspective and a ten-year time horizon. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were performed. Costs are reported in 2020 USD ($). Findings: The economic cost per person was $0.27 for MDA and $0.43 for school-based targeted PC. MDA in Dak Lak will cost $472,000 per year, while school-based targeted PC will cost $117,000. Over 10 years, MDA is estimated to avert an additional 121,465 DALYs; 4,019,262 hookworm infection-years, and 765,844 moderate-to-heavy intensity hookworm infection-years compared to school-based targeted PC. The ICER was $28.55 per DALY averted; $0.87 per hookworm infection-years averted, and $4.54 per moderate-to-heavy intensity hookworm infection-years averted. MDA was cost-effective in all PSA iterations. Interpretation: In areas where hookworm predominates and adults suffer a significant burden of infection, MDA is cost effective compared to school based targeted PC and is the best strategy to achieve global targets. Funding: The project was funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) of Australia (Project Grant APP1139561) and JPCDT was supported by a UNSW Scientia PhD Scholarship.

Barriers and facilitators to HIV and syphilis rapid diagnostic testing in antenatal care settings in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Testing and treatment during pregnancy is a well-established and cost-effective prevention strategy, which relies largely on use of rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs). Yet, in many low-income and-middle-income countries, the uptake of RDTs is suboptimal. A qualitative meta-synthesis was conducted to identify the barriers and enablers to use of HIV and syphilis RDTs among pregnant women in low-income and middle-income countries. METHODS: This review was conducted using PRISMA guidelines. Eligible studies included peer-reviewed publications, which used qualitative methods to explore HIV and syphilis RDT in antenatal care clinics in low-income and middle-income countries. Studies focusing on perspectives of pregnant women, healthcare workers and/or stakeholders were included. We used an inductive approach informed by a modified socioecological model to synthesise the data. RESULTS: 62 manuscripts met the eligibility criteria. For pregnant women, initial acceptance of the RDT and continuation in antenatal care depends on the perception that engaging in testing will be a beneficial experience for their baby and themselves, often influenced by the provision of services that are gender-sensitive, confidential, respectful, flexible and considers their well-being into the future. Local sociocultural beliefs about pregnancy and diseases, awareness of diseases and gender roles in society also influenced RDT acceptability among pregnant women. For healthcare workers, the ability to provide high-quality RDT care required ongoing training, accurate and easy to use tests, support from supervisors and communities, sufficient resources and staffing to provide services, and reliable salary. At the stakeholder level, well-developed guidelines and health system infrastructures were imperative to the delivery of RDT in antenatal clinics. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight clear gaps to the provision of sustainable and culturally acceptable maternal HIV and/or syphilis screening using RDTs. In addition, greater attention needs to be paid to community stakeholders in promoting the uptake of RDT in antenatal clinics. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018112190.

Return to full normal activities including work at two weeks after acute myocardial infarction.

Patients are generally advised to return to full normal activities, including work, 6 to 8 weeks after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). We assessed the outcomes of early return to normal activities, including work at 2 weeks, after AMI in patients who were stratified to be at a low risk for future cardiac events. Patients were considered for randomization before discharge if they had no angina, had left ventricular ejection fraction >40%, a negative result from a symptom-limited exercise stress test for ischemia (<2 mm ST depression) at 1 week, and achieved >7 METs. Patients with left ventricular ejection fraction <40% were included only if they did not have inducible ventricular tachycardia at electrophysiologic studies. Seventy-two patients were randomized to return to normal activities at 2 weeks and 70 patients to undergo standard cardiac rehabilitation and return to normal activities at 6 weeks after AMI. There were no deaths or heart failure in either group. There was no significant difference in the incidence of reinfarction, revascularization, left ventricular function, lipids, body mass index, smoking, or exercise test results at 6 months. In conclusion, return to full normal activities, including work at 2 weeks, after AMI appears to be safe in patients who are stratified to a low-risk group. This should have significant medical and socioeconomic implications.

Comparing the preferences of health professionals and members of the public for setting health care priorities : experiences from Australia.

INTRODUCTION: This article reports on a priority-setting exercise involving members of the general public and health professionals. The aim is to compare the healthcare priorities of these two groups, as well as their attitudes towards public involvement in priority setting. METHODS: A convenience sample of 373 members of the public attending two central Sydney, Australia, medical clinics were asked to complete a structured, interviewer-administered questionnaire. Forty-four purposively sampled healthcare professionals working in central Sydney completed the same questionnaire. Both groups were asked whether the preferences of the public should inform priority-setting decisions. They then had to allocate an additional (but fixed) amount of healthcare resources across competing programmes, medical procedures and population groups and their preferences were compared. RESULTS: The health professionals and members of the public strongly supported using public preferences to inform priorities in healthcare. Both groups expressed a slightly stronger preference for using public preferences to inform priorities across healthcare programmes and population groups than for medical interventions. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Considerable uniformity of preferences was revealed between the health professionals and the members of the public. However, it is argued that, even where the preferences of health professionals are consistent with and representative of those of the wider community, public involvement is important in terms of procedural justice, as it helps to legitimise both the process and the resultant priorities.