The Importance of Failure: How Doing Impact Surveys That Fail Saves Trachoma Programs Money.

Trachoma programs use annual antibiotic mass drug administration (MDA) in evaluation units (EUs) that generally encompass 100,000-250,000 people. After one, three, or five MDA rounds, programs undertake impact surveys. Where impact survey prevalence of trachomatous inflammation-follicular (TF) in 1- to 9-year-olds is ≥ 5%, ≥ 1 additional MDA rounds are recommended before resurvey. Impact survey costs, and the proportion of impact surveys returning TF prevalence ≥ 5% (the failure rate or, less pejoratively, the MDA continuation rate), therefore influence the cost of eliminating trachoma. We modeled, for illustrative EU sizes, the financial cost of undertaking MDA with and without conducting impact surveys. As an example, we retrospectively assessed how conducting impact surveys affected costs in the United Republic of Tanzania for 2017-2018. For EUs containing 100,000 people, the median (interquartile range) cost of continuing MDA without doing impact surveys is USD 28,957 (17,581-36,197) per EU per year, whereas continuing MDA solely where indicated by impact survey results costs USD 17,564 (12,158-21,694). If the mean EU population is 100,000, then continuing MDA without impact surveys becomes advantageous in financial cost terms only when the continuation rate exceeds 71%. For the United Republic of Tanzania in 2017-2018, doing impact surveys saved enough money to provide MDA for > 1,000,000 people. Although trachoma impact surveys have a nontrivial cost, they generally save money, providing EUs have > 50,000 inhabitants, the continuation rate is not excessive, and they generate reliable data. If all EUs pass their impact surveys, then we have waited too long to do them.

A Test-and-Not-Treat Strategy for Onchocerciasis Elimination in Loa loa-coendemic Areas: Cost Analysis of a Pilot in the Soa Health District, Cameroon.

BACKGROUND: Severe adverse events after treatment with ivermectin in individuals with high levels of Loa loa microfilariae in the blood preclude onchocerciasis elimination through community-directed treatment with ivermectin (CDTI) in Central Africa. We measured the cost of a community-based pilot using a test-and-not-treat (TaNT) strategy in the Soa health district in Cameroon. METHODS: Based on actual expenditures, we empirically estimated the economic cost of the Soa TaNT campaign, including financial costs and opportunity costs that will likely be borne by control programs and stakeholders in the future. In addition to the empirical analyses, we estimated base-case, less intensive, and more intensive resource use scenarios to explore how costs might differ if TaNT were implemented programmatically. RESULTS: The total costs of US$283 938 divided by total population, people tested, and people treated with 42% coverage were US$4.0, US$9.2, and US$9.5, respectively. In programmatic implementation, these costs (base-case estimates with less and more intensive scenarios) could be US$2.2 ($1.9-$3.6), US$5.2 ($4.5-$8.3), and US$5.4 ($4.6-$8.6), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: TaNT clearly provides a safe strategy for large-scale ivermectin treatment and overcomes a major obstacle to the elimination of onchocerciasis in areas coendemic for Loa loa. Although it is more expensive than standard CDTI, costs vary depending on the setting, the implementation choices made by the institutions involved, and the community participation rate. Research on the required duration of TaNT is needed to improve the affordability assessment, and more experience is needed to understand how to implement TaNT optimally.

Economic analysis of dengue prevention and case management in the Maldives.

As tourism is the mainstay of the Maldives' economy, this country recognizes the importance of controlling mosquito-borne diseases in an environmentally responsible manner. This study sought to estimate the economic costs of dengue in this Small Island Developing State of 417,492 residents. The authors reviewed relevant available documents on dengue epidemiology and conducted site visits and interviews with public health offices, health centers, referral hospitals, health insurers, and drug distribution organizations. An average of 1,543 symptomatic dengue cases was reported annually from 2011 through 2016. Intensive waste and water management on a resort island cost $1.60 per occupied room night. Local vector control programs on inhabited islands cost $35.93 for waste collection and $7.89 for household visits by community health workers per person per year. Ambulatory care for a dengue episode cost $49.87 at a health center, while inpatient episodes averaged $127.74 at a health center, $1,164.78 at a regional hospital, and $1,655.50 at a tertiary referral hospital. Overall, the cost of dengue illness in the Maldives in 2015 was $2,495,747 (0.06% of gross national income, GNI, or $6.10 per resident) plus $1,338,141 (0.03% of GNI or $3.27 per resident) for dengue surveillance. With tourism generating annual income of $898 and tax revenues of $119 per resident, results of an international analysis suggest that the risk of dengue lowers the country's gross annual income by $110 per resident (95% confidence interval $50 to $160) and its annual tax receipts by $14 per resident (95% confidence interval $7 to $22). Many innovative vector control efforts are affordable and could decrease future costs of dengue illness in the Maldives.

Monitoring equity in universal health coverage with essential services for neglected tropical diseases: an analysis of data reported for five diseases in 123 countries over 9 years.

BACKGROUND: A service coverage index has recently been proposed to monitor progress towards universal health coverage (UHC), and baseline results for 2015 are available. However, evidence on equity in that progress is scarce. The service coverage index did not consider services for neglected tropical diseases (NTDs), a group of preventable diseases defined by WHO member states on the basis of the disproportionate burden they place on their poorest, remotest, and otherwise most marginalised communities. Because of the much-needed equity lens that it could provide, NTD service coverage should not be neglected in efforts to monitor UHC progress. METHODS: We developed an index focused on coverage of services for NTDs, comparable in methods to the UHC service coverage index. On the basis of data availability, we focused on preventive chemotherapy, which was recently included in the highest-priority package of essential UHC interventions. We used data reported to WHO since 2008 for the five NTDs amenable to preventive chemotherapy (lymphatic filariasis, onchocerciasis, schistosomiasis, soil-transmitted helminthiases, and trachoma) to develop an NTD service coverage index based on the geometric mean of coverage rates for individual NTD services with regularly reported data. We then compared this NTD service coverage index with the UHC service coverage index. A high UHC index value and a low NTD index value suggest that a country might not be adequately prioritising interventions for the poor. We measured Spearman rank-order correlation (ρ) of the NTD service coverage index with income inequality, as measured by the Gini coefficient (range of 0-1), where values of the Gini coefficient close to 1 indicate higher income inequality, and a negative correlation was evidence of socioeconomic barriers to health service coverage for people who are least well off. FINDINGS: At least 123 countries can monitor NTD service coverage by use of a simple index. The median national NTD index was 32 in 2016, an increase from 3 in 2012, and from 0 in 2008. In 2015, the NTD index was lower than the UHC index in 81 of the 113 countries for which both NTD and UHC indices are available, by up to 80 points. The NTD index was negatively but weakly correlated with income inequality; this correlation was strongest in the African Region (ρ=-0·46 in 2008, ρ=-0·32 in 2015), suggesting that high-income inequality, although associated with low coverage of services targeting the poor, does not preclude the extension of that coverage. INTERPRETATION: The NTD index can be used to measure equity in progress towards UHC. A broader NTD index including services for other NTDs could be developed at regional and country levels. Comparing the NTD and UHC service coverage indices reveals that some countries that are performing well by the measure of the UHC service coverage index still have work to do in prioritising services for their poorest and otherwise most marginalised communities. Our results offer hope that socioeconomic barriers to health service coverage can be overcome. FUNDING: None.

Econometric estimation of WHO-CHOICE country-specific costs for inpatient and outpatient health service delivery.

BACKGROUND: Policy makers require information on costs related to inpatient and outpatient health services to inform resource allocation decisions. METHODS: Country data sets were gathered in 2008-2010 through literature reviews, website searches and a public call for cost data. Multivariate regression analysis was used to explore the determinants of variability in unit costs using data from 30 countries. Two models were designed, with the inpatient and outpatient models drawing upon 3407 and 9028 observations respectively. Cost estimates are produced at country and regional level, with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Inpatient costs across 30 countries are significantly associated with the type of hospital, ownership, as well as bed occupancy rate, average length of stay, and total number of inpatient admissions. Changes in outpatient costs are significantly associated with location, facility ownership and the level of care, as well as to the number of outpatient visits and visits per provider per day. CONCLUSIONS: These updated WHO-CHOICE service delivery unit costs are statistically robust and may be used by analysts as inputs for economic analysis. The models can predict country-specific unit costs at different capacity levels and in different settings.

Socioeconomic benefit to individuals of achieving 2020 targets for four neglected tropical diseases controlled/eliminated by innovative and intensified disease management: Human African trypanosomiasis, leprosy, visceral leishmaniasis, Chagas disease.

BACKGROUND: The control or elimination of neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) has targets defined by the WHO for 2020, reinforced by the 2012 London Declaration. We estimated the economic impact to individuals of meeting these targets for human African trypanosomiasis, leprosy, visceral leishmaniasis and Chagas disease, NTDs controlled or eliminated by innovative and intensified disease management (IDM). METHODS: A systematic literature review identified information on productivity loss and out-of-pocket payments (OPPs) related to these NTDs, which were combined with projections of the number of people suffering from each NTD, country and year for 2011-2020 and 2021-2030. The ideal scenario in which the WHO's 2020 targets are met was compared with a counterfactual scenario that assumed the situation of 1990 stayed unaltered. Economic benefit equaled the difference between the two scenarios. Values are reported in 2005 US$, purchasing power parity-adjusted, discounted at 3% per annum from 2010. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses were used to quantify the degree of uncertainty around the base-case impact estimate. RESULTS: The total global productivity gained for the four IDM-NTDs was I$ 23.1 (I$ 15.9 -I$ 34.0) billion in 2011-2020 and I$ 35.9 (I$ 25.0 -I$ 51.9) billion in 2021-2030 (2.5th and 97.5th percentiles in brackets), corresponding to US$ 10.7 billion (US$ 7.4 -US$ 15.7) and US$ 16.6 billion (US$ 11.6 -US$ 24.0). Reduction in OPPs was I$ 14 billion (US$ 6.7 billion) and I$ 18 billion (US$ 10.4 billion) for the same periods. CONCLUSIONS: We faced important limitations to our work, such as finding no OPPs for leprosy. We had to combine limited data from various sources, heterogeneous background, and of variable quality. Nevertheless, based on conservative assumptions and subsequent uncertainty analyses, we estimate that the benefits of achieving the targets are considerable. Under plausible scenarios, the economic benefits far exceed the necessary investments by endemic country governments and their development partners. Given the higher frequency of NTDs among the poorest households, these investments represent good value for money in the effort to improve well-being, distribute the world's prosperity more equitably and reduce inequity.

The cost and cost-effectiveness of rapid testing strategies for yaws diagnosis and surveillance.

BACKGROUND: Yaws is a non-venereal treponemal infection caused by Treponema pallidum subspecies pertenue. The disease is targeted by WHO for eradication by 2020. Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) are envisaged for confirmation of clinical cases during treatment campaigns and for certification of the interruption of transmission. Yaws testing requires both treponemal (trep) and non-treponemal (non-trep) assays for diagnosis of current infection. We evaluate a sequential testing strategy (using a treponemal RDT before a trep/non-trep RDT) in terms of cost and cost-effectiveness, relative to a single-assay combined testing strategy (using the trep/non-trep RDT alone), for two use cases: individual diagnosis and community surveillance. METHODS: We use cohort decision analysis to examine the diagnostic and cost outcomes. We estimate cost and cost-effectiveness of the alternative testing strategies at different levels of prevalence of past/current infection and current infection under each use case. We take the perspective of the global yaws eradication programme. We calculate the total number of correct diagnoses for each strategy over a range of plausible prevalences. We employ probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) to account for uncertainty and report 95% intervals. RESULTS: At current prices of the treponemal and trep/non-trep RDTs, the sequential strategy is cost-saving for individual diagnosis at prevalence of past/current infection less than 85% (81-90); it is cost-saving for surveillance at less than 100%. The threshold price of the trep/non-trep RDT (below which the sequential strategy would no longer be cost-saving) is US$ 1.08 (1.02-1.14) for individual diagnosis at high prevalence of past/current infection (51%) and US$ 0.54 (0.52-0.56) for community surveillance at low prevalence (15%). DISCUSSION: We find that the sequential strategy is cost-saving for both diagnosis and surveillance in most relevant settings. In the absence of evidence assessing relative performance (sensitivity and specificity), cost-effectiveness is uncertain. However, the conditions under which the combined test only strategy might be more cost-effective than the sequential strategy are limited. A cheaper trep/non-trep RDT is needed, costing no more than US$ 0.50-1.00, depending on the use case. Our results will help enhance the cost-effectiveness of yaws programmes in the 13 countries known to be currently endemic. It will also inform efforts in the much larger group of 71 countries with a history of yaws, many of which will have to undertake surveillance to confirm the interruption of transmission.

The cost-effectiveness of an eradication programme in the end game: Evidence from guinea worm disease.

BACKGROUND: Of the three diseases targeted for eradication by WHO, two are so-called Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs)-guinea worm disease (GWD) and yaws. The Guinea Worm Eradication Programme (GWEP) is in its final stages, with only 25 reported in 2016. However, global eradication still requires certification by WHO of the absence of transmission in all countries. We analyze the cost-effectiveness of the GWEP in the end game, when the number of cases is lower and the cost per case is higher than at any other time. Ours is the first economic evaluation of the GWEP since a World Bank study in 1997. METHODS: Using data from the GWEP, we estimate the cost of the implementation, pre-certification and certification stages. We model cost-effectiveness in the period 1986-2030. We compare the GWEP to two alternative scenarios: doing nothing (no intervention since 1986) and control (only surveillance and outbreak response during 2016-2030). We report the cost per case averted, cost per disability adjusted life year (DALY) averted and cost per at-risk life year averted. We assess cost-effectiveness against a threshold of about one half GDP per capita (less than US$ 500 in low income countries). All costs are expressed in US$ of 2015. RESULTS: The GWEP cost an estimated US$ 11 (95% uncertainty interval, 4.70-12.49) per case averted in the period 1986-2030. The pre-certification and certification phases can cost as much as US$ 0.0041 and US$ 0.0015 per capita per year. The cost per DALY averted by the GWEP relative to doing nothing is estimated at US$ 222 (118-372) in 1986-2030. The GWEP is probably more cost-effective than control by the year 2030. The GWEP is certainly more cost-effective than control if willingness to pay for one year of life lived without the risk of GWD exceeds US$ 0.10. DISCUSSION: Even if economic costs are two times as high as the financial costs estimated for the period to 2020, the GWEP will still be cost-effective relative to doing nothing. Whether the GWEP turns out to be the most cost-effective alternative in the period beyond 2015 depends on the time horizon. When framed in terms of the number of years of life lived without the risk of GWD, a case can be made more easily for finishing the end game, including certification of the absence of transmission.

An economic evaluation of vector control in the age of a dengue vaccine.

INTRODUCTION: Dengue is a rapidly emerging vector-borne Neglected Tropical Disease, with a 30-fold increase in the number of cases reported since 1960. The economic cost of the illness is measured in the billions of dollars annually. Environmental change and unplanned urbanization are conspiring to raise the health and economic cost even further beyond the reach of health systems and households. The health-sector response has depended in large part on control of the Aedes aegypti and Ae. albopictus (mosquito) vectors. The cost-effectiveness of the first-ever dengue vaccine remains to be evaluated in the field. In this paper, we examine how it might affect the cost-effectiveness of sustained vector control. METHODS: We employ a dynamic Markov model of the effects of vector control on dengue in both vectors and humans over a 15-year period, in six countries: Brazil, Columbia, Malaysia, Mexico, the Philippines, and Thailand. We evaluate the cost (direct medical costs and control programme costs) and cost-effectiveness of sustained vector control, outbreak response and/or medical case management, in the presence of a (hypothetical) highly targeted and low cost immunization strategy using a (non-hypothetical) medium-efficacy vaccine. RESULTS: Sustained vector control using existing technologies would cost little more than outbreak response, given the associated costs of medical case management. If sustained use of existing or upcoming technologies (of similar price) reduce vector populations by 70-90%, the cost per disability-adjusted life year averted is 2013 US$ 679-1331 (best estimates) relative to no intervention. Sustained vector control could be highly cost-effective even with less effective technologies (50-70% reduction in vector populations) and in the presence of a highly targeted and low cost immunization strategy using a medium-efficacy vaccine. DISCUSSION: Economic evaluation of the first-ever dengue vaccine is ongoing. However, even under very optimistic assumptions about a highly targeted and low cost immunization strategy, our results suggest that sustained vector control will continue to play an important role in mitigating the impact of environmental change and urbanization on human health. If additional benefits for the control of other Aedes borne diseases, such as Chikungunya, yellow fever and Zika fever are taken into account, the investment case is even stronger. High-burden endemic countries should proceed to map populations to be covered by sustained vector control.

The cross-cutting contribution of the end of neglected tropical diseases to the sustainable development goals.

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) call for an integrated response, the kind that has defined Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs) efforts in the past decade.NTD interventions have the greatest relevance for SDG3, the health goal, where the focus on equity, and its commitment to reaching people in need of health services, wherever they may live and whatever their circumstances, is fundamentally aligned with the target of Universal Health Coverage. NTD interventions, however, also affect and are affected by many of the other development areas covered under the 2030 Agenda. Strategies such as mass drug administration or the programmatic integration of NTD and WASH activities (SDG6) are driven by effective global partnerships (SDG17). Intervention against the NTDs can also have an impact on poverty (SDG1) and hunger (SDG2), can improve education (SDG4), work and economic growth (SDG8), thereby reducing inequalities (SDG10). The community-led distribution of donated medicines to more than 1 billion people reinforces women's empowerment (SDG5), logistics infrastructure (SDG9) and non-discrimination against disability (SDG16). Interventions to curb mosquito-borne NTDs contribute to the goals of urban sustainability (SDG11) and resilience to climate change (SDG13), while the safe use of insecticides supports the goal of sustainable ecosystems (SDG15). Although indirectly, interventions to control water- and animal-related NTDs can facilitate the goals of small-scale fishing (SDG14) and sustainable hydroelectricity and biofuels (SDG7).NTDs proliferate in less developed areas in countries across the income spectrum, areas where large numbers of people have little or no access to adequate health care, clean water, sanitation, housing, education, transport and information. This scoping review assesses how in this context, ending the epidemic of the NTDs can impact and improve our prospects of attaining the SDGs.

The Socioeconomic Benefit to Individuals of Achieving the 2020 Targets for Five Preventive Chemotherapy Neglected Tropical Diseases.

BACKGROUND: Lymphatic filariasis (LF), onchocerciasis, schistosomiasis, soil-transmitted helminths (STH) and trachoma represent the five most prevalent neglected tropical diseases (NTDs). They can be controlled or eliminated by means of safe and cost-effective interventions delivered through programs of Mass Drug Administration (MDA)-also named Preventive Chemotherapy (PCT). The WHO defined targets for NTD control/elimination by 2020, reinforced by the 2012 London Declaration, which, if achieved, would result in dramatic health gains. We estimated the potential economic benefit of achieving these targets, focusing specifically on productivity and out-of-pocket payments. METHODS: Productivity loss was calculated by combining disease frequency with productivity loss from the disease, from the perspective of affected individuals. Productivity gain was calculated by deducting the total loss expected in the target achievement scenario from the loss in a counterfactual scenario where it was assumed the pre-intervention situation in 1990 regarding NTDs would continue unabated until 2030. Economic benefits from out-of-pocket payments (OPPs) were calculated similarly. Benefits are reported in 2005 US$ (purchasing power parity-adjusted and discounted at 3% per annum from 2010). Sensitivity analyses were used to assess the influence of changes in input parameters. RESULTS: The economic benefit from productivity gain was estimated to be I$251 billion in 2011-2020 and I$313 billion in 2021-2030, considerably greater than the total OPPs averted of I$0.72 billion and I$0.96 billion in the same periods. The net benefit is expected to be US$ 27.4 and US$ 42.8 for every dollar invested during the same periods. Impact varies between NTDs and regions, since it is determined by disease prevalence and extent of disease-related productivity loss. CONCLUSION: Achieving the PCT-NTD targets for 2020 will yield significant economic benefits to affected individuals. Despite large uncertainty, these benefits far exceed the investment required by governments and their development partners within all reasonable scenarios. Given the concentration of the NTDs among the poorest households, these investments represent good value for money in efforts to share the world's prosperity and reduce inequity.

Mathematical Modeling of Programmatic Requirements for Yaws Eradication.

Yaws is targeted for eradication by 2020. The mainstay of the eradication strategy is mass treatment followed by case finding. Modeling has been used to inform programmatic requirements for other neglected tropical diseases and could provide insights into yaws eradication. We developed a model of yaws transmission varying the coverage and number of rounds of treatment. The estimated number of cases arising from an index case (basic reproduction number [R0]) ranged from 1.08 to 3.32. To have 80% probability of achieving eradication, 8 rounds of treatment with 80% coverage were required at low estimates of R0 (1.45). This requirement increased to 95% at high estimates of R0 (2.47). Extending the treatment interval to 12 months increased requirements at all estimates of R0. At high estimates of R0 with 12 monthly rounds of treatment, no combination of variables achieved eradication. Models should be used to guide the scale-up of yaws eradication.

Investment Success in Public Health: An Analysis of the Cost-Effectiveness and Cost-Benefit of the Global Programme to Eliminate Lymphatic Filariasis.

Background: It has been estimated that $154 million per year will be required during 2015-2020 to continue the Global Programme to Eliminate Lymphatic Filariasis (GPELF). In light of this, it is important to understand the program's current value. Here, we evaluate the cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of the preventive chemotherapy that was provided under the GPELF between 2000 and 2014. In addition, we also investigate the potential cost-effectiveness of hydrocele surgery. Methods: Our economic evaluation of preventive chemotherapy was based on previously published health and economic impact estimates (between 2000 and 2014). The delivery costs of treatment were estimated using a model developed by the World Health Organization. We also developed a model to investigate the number of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted by a hydrocelectomy and identified the cost threshold under which it would be considered cost-effective. Results: The projected cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit of preventive chemotherapy were very promising, and this was robust over a wide range of costs and assumptions. When the economic value of the donated drugs was not included, the GPELF would be classed as highly cost-effective. We projected that a typical hydrocelectomy would be classed as highly cost-effective if the surgery cost less than $66 and cost-effective if less than $398 (based on the World Bank's cost-effectiveness thresholds for low income countries). Conclusions: Both the preventive chemotherapy and hydrocele surgeries provided under the GPELF are incredibly cost-effective and offer a very good investment in public health.

Benchmarking the Cost per Person of Mass Treatment for Selected Neglected Tropical Diseases: An Approach Based on Literature Review and Meta-regression with Web-Based Software Application.

BACKGROUND: Advocacy around mass treatment for the elimination of selected Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs) has typically put the cost per person treated at less than US$ 0.50. Whilst useful for advocacy, the focus on a single number misrepresents the complexity of delivering "free" donated medicines to about a billion people across the world. We perform a literature review and meta-regression of the cost per person per round of mass treatment against NTDs. We develop a web-based software application (https://healthy.shinyapps.io/benchmark/) to calculate setting-specific unit costs against which programme budgets and expenditures or results-based pay-outs can be benchmarked. METHODS: We reviewed costing studies of mass treatment for the control, elimination or eradication of lymphatic filariasis, schistosomiasis, soil-transmitted helminthiasis, onchocerciasis, trachoma and yaws. These are the main 6 NTDs for which mass treatment is recommended. We extracted financial and economic unit costs, adjusted to a standard definition and base year. We regressed unit costs on the number of people treated and other explanatory variables. Regression results were used to "predict" country-specific unit cost benchmarks. RESULTS: We reviewed 56 costing studies and included in the meta-regression 34 studies from 23 countries and 91 sites. Unit costs were found to be very sensitive to economies of scale, and the decision of whether or not to use local volunteers. Financial unit costs are expected to be less than 2015 US$ 0.50 in most countries for programmes that treat 100 thousand people or more. However, for smaller programmes, including those in the "last mile", or those that cannot rely on local volunteers, both economic and financial unit costs are expected to be higher. DISCUSSION: The available evidence confirms that mass treatment offers a low cost public health intervention on the path towards universal health coverage. However, more costing studies focussed on elimination are needed. Unit cost benchmarks can help in monitoring value for money in programme plans, budgets and accounts, or in setting a reasonable pay-out for results-based financing mechanisms.

Cost-effectiveness of a comprehensive programme for drug-resistant tuberculosis in China.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the cost-effectiveness of a comprehensive programme for drug-resistant tuberculosis launched in four sites in China in 2011. METHODS: In 2011-2012, we reviewed the records of 172 patients with drug-resistant tuberculosis who enrolled in the comprehensive programme and we collected relevant administrative data from hospitals and China's public health agency. For comparison, we examined a cohort of 81 patients who were treated for drug-resistant tuberculosis in 2006-2009. We performed a cost-effectiveness analysis, from a societal perspective, that included probabilistic uncertainty. We measured early treatment outcomes based on three-month culture results and modelled longer-term outcomes to facilitate estimation of the comprehensive programme's cost per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted. FINDINGS: The comprehensive programme cost 8837 United States dollars (US$) per patient treated. Low enrolment rates meant that some fixed costs were higher, per patient, than expected. Although the comprehensive programme appeared 30 times more costly than the previous one, it resulted in greater health benefits. The comprehensive programme, which cost US$ 639 (95% credible interval: 112 to 1322) per DALY averted, satisfied the World Health Organization's criterion for a very cost-effective intervention. CONCLUSION: The comprehensive programme, which included rapid screening, standardized care and financial protection, improved individual outcomes for MDR tuberculosis in a cost-effective manner. To support post-2015 global heath targets, the comprehensive programme should be expanded to non-residents and other areas of China.

Soil-transmitted helminthiasis: the relationship between prevalence and classes of intensity of infection.

BACKGROUND: Recently, WHO has developed a predictive model to evaluate the impact of preventive chemotherapy programs to control the morbidity of soil-transmitted helminths (STHs). To make predictions, this model needs baseline information about the proportion of infections classified as low, moderate and high intensity, for each of the three STH species. However, epidemiological data available are often limited to prevalence estimates. METHODS: We reanalyzed available data from 19 surveys in 10 countries and parameterized the relationship between prevalence of STH infections and the proportion of moderate and heavy intensity infections. RESULTS: The equations derived allow feeding the WHO model with estimates of the proportion of the different classes of infection intensity when only prevalence data is available. CONCLUSIONS: The prediction capacities of the STH model using the equations developed in the present study, should be tested by comparing it with the changes on STH epidemiological data observed in control programs operating for several years.

Where the road ends, yaws begins? The cost-effectiveness of eradication versus more roads.

INTRODUCTION: A disabling and disfiguring disease that "begins where the road ends", yaws is targeted by WHO for eradication by the year 2020. The global campaign is not yet financed. To evaluate yaws eradication within the context of the post-2015 development agenda, we perform a somewhat allegorical cost-effectiveness analysis of eradication, comparing it to a counterfactual in which we simply wait for more roads (the end of poverty). METHODS: We use evidence from four yaws eradication pilot sites and other mass treatment campaigns to set benchmarks for the cost of eradication in 12 known endemic countries. We construct a compartmental model of long-term health effects to 2050. Conservatively, we attribute zero cost to the counterfactual and allow for gradual exit of the susceptible (at risk) population by road (poverty reduction). We report mean, 5th and 95th centile estimates to reflect uncertainty about costs and effects. RESULTS: Our benchmark for the economic cost of yaws eradication is uncertain but not high -US$ 362 (75-1073) million in 12 countries. Eradication would cost US$ 26 (4.2-78) for each year of life lived without disability or disfigurement due to yaws, or US$ 324 (47-936) per disability-adjusted life year (DALY). Excluding drugs, existing staff and assets, the financial cost benchmark is US$ 213 (74-522) million. The real cost of waiting for more roads (poverty reduction) would be 13 (7.3-20) million years of life affected by early-stage yaws and 2.3 (1.1-4.2) million years of life affected by late-stage yaws. DISCUSSION: Endemic countries need financing to begin implementing and adapting global strategy to local conditions. Donations of drugs and diagnostics could reduce cost to the public sector and catalyze financing. Resources may be harnessed from the extractive industries. Yaws eradication should be seen as complementary to universal health coverage and shared prosperity on the post-2015 development agenda.