The state of costing research for HIV interventions in sub-Saharan Africa.

The past decade has seen a growing emphasis on the production of high-quality costing data to improve the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of global health interventions. The need for such data is especially important for decision making and priority setting across HIV services from prevention and testing to treatment and care. To help address this critical need, the Global Health Cost Consortium was created in 2016, in part to conduct a systematic search and screening of the costing literature for HIV and TB interventions in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). The purpose of this portion of the remit was to compile, standardise, and make publicly available published cost data (peer-reviewed and gray) for public use. We limit our analysis to a review of the quantity and characteristics of published cost data from HIV interventions in sub-Saharan Africa. First, we document the production of cost data over 25 years, including density over time, geography, publication venue, authorship and type of intervention. Second, we explore key methods and reporting for characteristics including urbanicity, platform type, ownership and scale. Although the volume of HIV costing data has increased substantially on the continent, cost reporting is lacking across several dimensions. We find a dearth of cost estimates from HIV interventions in west Africa, as well as inconsistent reporting of key dimensions of cost including platform type, ownership and urbanicity. Further, we find clear evidence of a need for renewed focus on the consistent reporting of scale by authors of costing and cost-effectiveness analyses.

Developing the Global Health Cost Consortium Unit Cost Study Repository for HIV and TB: methodology and lessons learned.

Consistently defined, accurate, and easily accessible cost data are a valuable resource to inform efficiency analyses, budget preparation, and sustainability planning in global health. The Global Health Cost Consortium (GHCC) designed the Unit Cost Study Repository (UCSR) to be a resource for standardised HIV and TB intervention cost data displayed by key characteristics such as intervention type, country, and target population. To develop the UCSR, the GHCC defined a typology of interventions for each disease; aligned interventions according to the standardised principles, methods, and cost and activity categories from the GHCC Reference Case for Estimating the Costs of Global Health Services and Interventions; completed a systematic literature review; conducted extensive data extraction; performed quality assurance; grappled with complex methodological issues such as the proper approach to the inflation and conversion of costs; developed and implemented a study quality rating system; and designed a web-based user interface that flexibly displays large amounts of data in a user-friendly way. Key lessons learned from the extraction process include the importance of assessing the multiple uses of extracted data; the critical role of standardising definitions (particularly units of measurement); using appropriate classifications of interventions and components of costs; the efficiency derived from programming data checks; and the necessity of extraction quality monitoring by senior analysts. For the web interface, lessons were: understanding the target audiences, including consulting them regarding critical characteristics; designing the display of data in "levels"; and incorporating alert and unique trait descriptions to further clarify differences in the data.

The Cost of Intramedullary Nailing Versus Skeletal Traction for Treatment of Femoral Shaft Fractures in Malawi: A Prospective Economic Analysis.

BACKGROUND: In many low- and middle-income countries, non-surgical management of femoral shaft fractures using skeletal traction is common because intramedullary (IM) nailing is perceived to be expensive. This study assessed the cost of IM nailing and skeletal traction for treatment of femoral shaft fractures in Malawi. METHODS: We used micro-costing methods to quantify the costs associated with IM nailing and skeletal traction. Adult patients who sustained an isolated closed femur shaft fracture and managed at Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital in Malawi were followed from admission to discharge. Resource utilization and time data were collected through direct observation. Costs were quantified for procedures and ward personnel, medications, investigations, surgical implants, disposable supplies, procedures instruments and overhead. RESULTS: We followed 38 nailing and 27 traction patients admitted between April 2016 and November 2017. Nailing patient's average length of stay (LOS) was 36.35 days (SD 21.19), compared to 61 (SD 18.16) for traction (p = 0.0003). The total cost per patient was $596.97 ($168.81) for nailing and $678.02 (SD $144.25) for traction (p = 0.02). Major cost drivers were ward personnel and overhead; both are directly proportional to LOS. Converting patients from traction to nailing is cost-saving up to day 23 post-admission. CONCLUSION: Savings from IM nailing as compared with skeletal traction were achieved by shortened LOS. Although this study did not assess the effectiveness of either intervention, the literature suggests that traction carries a higher rate of complications than nailing. Investment in IM nailing capacity may yield substantial net savings to health systems, as well as improved clinical outcomes.

Evaluating meniscus allograft transplant using a cost-effectiveness threshold analysis.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown if meniscal allograft transplant (MAT) delays progression of osteoarthritis (OA). Cost-effectiveness threshold analysis can demonstrate the necessary delay in OA progression required by MAT to be considered cost-effective compared to non-operative management. The purpose of this study is to identify the efficacy MAT requires in delaying progression to OA in previously meniscectomized knees in order to be considered cost-effective compared to non-operative treatment. A secondary goal is to demonstrate the influence of age and BMI on the required efficacy of MAT for cost-effectiveness. METHODS: A Markov model was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of MAT compared to non-operative management for patients with prior meniscectomy. Input parameters were identified in existing literature. Cost was derived from literature and The PearlDiver Patient Records Database. The required rate of OA progression was compared across treatment modalities to determine how effective MAT is required to be cost-effective. RESULTS: MAT needs to be 31% more effective in delaying OA compared to non-operative interventions in order to be cost-effective. MAT is most cost-effective in 20-29 year-old patients, requiring a 25% greater efficacy in delaying OA. Obesity (BMI 30-35) makes MAT less cost-effective when compared to non-obese patients; however, the difference in required efficacy in delaying OA among obese patient when compared to non-operative management is approximately 10%. CONCLUSIONS: MAT needs to be approximately one-third more effective in delaying OA in previously meniscectomized knees to be considered cost-effective. Younger, non-obese patients have the lowest required efficacy of MAT to be cost-effective.