RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Information on cost-effectiveness allows policy-makers to evaluate if they are using currently available resources effectively and efficiently. Our objective is to examine the cost-effectiveness of health interventions to improve maternal, newborn and child health (MNCH) outcomes, to provide global evidence relative to the context of two geographic regions. METHODS: We consider interventions across the life course from adolescence to pregnancy and for children up to 5 years old. Interventions included are those that fall within the areas of immunization, child healthcare, nutrition, reproductive health, and maternal/newborn health, and for which it is possible to model impact on MNCH mortality outcomes using the Lives Saved Tool (LiST). Generalized cost-effectiveness analysis (GCEA) was used to derive average cost-effectiveness ratios (ACERs) for individual interventions and combinations (packages). Costs were assessed from the health system perspective and reported in international dollars. Health outcomes were estimated and reported as the gain in healthy life years (HLYs) due to the specific intervention or combination. The model was run for 2 regions: Eastern sub-Saharan Africa (SSA-E) and South-East Asia (SEA). RESULTS: The World Health Organization (WHO) recommended interventions to improve MNCH are generally considered cost-effective, with the majority of interventions demonstrating ACERs below I$100/HLY saved in the chosen settings (low-and middle-income countries [LMICs]). Best performing interventions are consistent across the two regions, and include family planning, neonatal resuscitation, management of pneumonia and neonatal infection, vitamin A supplementation, and measles vaccine. ACERs below I$100 can be found across all delivery platforms, from community to hospital level. The combination of interventions into packages (such as antenatal care) produces favorable ACERs. CONCLUSION: Within each region there are interventions which represent very good value for money. There are opportunities to gear investments towards high-impact interventions and packages for MNCH outcomes. Cost-effectiveness tools can be used at national level to inform investment cases and overall priority setting processes.
Assuntos
Saúde da Criança , Ressuscitação , África Subsaariana , Criança , Análise Custo-Benefício , Ásia Oriental , Feminino , Humanos , Recém-Nascido , Gravidez , Organização Mundial da SaúdeRESUMO
Building on long-term benefits of early intervention (Paper 2 of this Series) and increasing commitment to early childhood development (Paper 1 of this Series), scaled up support for the youngest children is essential to improving health, human capital, and wellbeing across the life course. In this third paper, new analyses show that the burden of poor development is higher than estimated, taking into account additional risk factors. National programmes are needed. Greater political prioritisation is core to scale-up, as are policies that afford families time and financial resources to provide nurturing care for young children. Effective and feasible programmes to support early child development are now available. All sectors, particularly education, and social and child protection, must play a role to meet the holistic needs of young children. However, health provides a critical starting point for scaling up, given its reach to pregnant women, families, and young children. Starting at conception, interventions to promote nurturing care can feasibly build on existing health and nutrition services at limited additional cost. Failure to scale up has severe personal and social consequences. Children at elevated risk for compromised development due to stunting and poverty are likely to forgo about a quarter of average adult income per year, and the cost of inaction to gross domestic product can be double what some countries currently spend on health. Services and interventions to support early childhood development are essential to realising the vision of the Sustainable Development Goals.