Estimation of potential social support requirement for tuberculosis patients in India.

Providing social support to tuberculosis (TB) patients is a recommended strategy as households having TB patients find themselves in a spiral of poverty because of high cost, huge income loss and several other economic consequences associated with TB treatment. However, there are few examples of social support globally. The Indian government introduced "Nikshay Poshan Yojana" scheme in 2018 to provide nutritional support for all registered TB patients. Financial incentive of Indian Rupee (INR) 500 (US$6) per month was proposed to be transferred directly to the registered beneficiaries' validated bank accounts. We examined the reach, timing, amount of benefit receipt, and the extent to which the benefit alleviated catastrophic costs (used as a proxy to measure the impact on permanent economic welfare as catastrophic cost is the level of cost that is likely to result in a permanent negative economic impact on households) by interviewing 1482 adult drug-susceptible TB patients from 16 districts of four states during 2019 to 2023, using the methods recommended by the World Health Organisation for estimating household costs of TB nationally. We also estimated the potential amount of social support required to achieve a zero catastrophic cost target. At the end of treatment, 31%-54% study participants received the benefit. 34%-60% of TB patients experienced catastrophic costs using different estimation methods and the benefit helped 2% study participants to remain below the catastrophic cost threshold. A uniform benefit amount of INR 10000 (US$127) for 6 months of treatment could reduce the incidence of catastrophic costs by 43%. To improve economic welfare of TB patients, levels of benefit need to be substantially increased which will have considerable budgetary impact on the TB programme. Hence, a targeted rather than universal approach may be considered. To maximise impact, at least half of the revised amount should be given immediately after treatment registration.

Cost-effectiveness of COVID rapid diagnostic tests for patients with severe/critical illness in low- and middle-income countries: A modeling study.

BACKGROUND: Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for coronavirus disease (COVID) are used in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to inform treatment decisions. However, to date, it is unclear when this use is cost-effective. Existing analyses are limited to a narrow set of countries and uses. The aim of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of COVID RDTs to inform the treatment of patients with severe illness in LMICs, considering real world practice. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of COVID testing across LMICs using a decision tree model, differentiating results by country income level, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) prevalence, and testing scenario (none, RDTs, polymerase chain reaction tests-PCRs and combinations). LMIC experts defined realistic care pathways and treatment options. Using a healthcare provider perspective and net monetary benefit approach, we assessed both intended (COVID symptom alleviation) and unintended (treatment side effects) health and economic impacts for each testing scenario. We included the side effects of corticosteroids, which are often the only available treatment for COVID. Because side effects depend both on the treatment and the patient's underlying illness (COVID or COVID-like illnesses, such as influenza), we considered the prevalence of COVID-like illnesses in our analyses. We found that SARS-CoV-2 testing of patients with severe COVID-like illness can be cost-effective in all LMICs, though only in some circumstances. High influenza prevalence among suspected COVID cases improves cost-effectiveness, since incorrectly provided corticosteroids may worsen influenza outcomes. In low- and some lower-middle-income countries, only patients with a high index of suspicion for COVID should be tested with RDTs, while other patients should be presumed to not have COVID. In some lower-middle-income and upper-middle-income countries, suspected severe COVID cases should almost always be tested. Further, in these settings, negative test results in patients with a high initial index of suspicion should be confirmed through PCR and, during influenza outbreaks, positive results in patients with a low initial index of suspicion should also be confirmed with a PCR. The use of interleukin-6 receptor blockers, when supported by testing, may also be cost-effective in higher-income LMICs. The cost at which they would be cost-effective in low-income countries ($162 to $406 per treatment course) is below current prices. The primary limitation of our analysis is substantial uncertainty around some of the parameters in our model due to limited data, most notably on current COVID mortality with standard of care, and insufficient evidence on the impact of corticosteroids on patients with severe influenza. CONCLUSIONS: COVID testing can be cost-effective to inform treatment of LMIC patients with severe COVID-like disease. The optimal algorithm is driven by country income level and health budgets, the level of suspicion that the patient may have COVID, and influenza prevalence. Further research to better characterize the unintended effects of corticosteroids, particularly on influenza cases, could improve decision making around the treatment of those with COVID-like symptoms in LMICs.

A health technology assessment of COVID-19 vaccination for Nigerian decision-makers: Identifying stakeholders and pathways to support evidence uptake.

BACKGROUND: Nigeria commenced rollout of vaccination for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in March 2021 as part of the national public health response to the pandemic. Findings from appropriately contextualized cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) as part of a wider process involving health technology assessment (HTA) approaches have been important in informing decision-making in this area. In this paper we outline the processes that were followed to identify COVID-19 vaccine stakeholders involved in the selection, approval, funding, procurement and rollout of vaccines in Nigeria, and describe the process routes we identified to support uptake of HTA-related information for evidence-informed policy in Nigeria. METHODS: Our approach to engaging with policy-makers and other stakeholders as part of an HTA of COVID vaccination in Nigeria consisted of three steps, namely: (i) informal discussions with key stakeholders; (ii) stakeholder mapping, analysis and engagement; and (iii) communication and dissemination strategies for the HTA-relevant evidence produced. The analysis of the stakeholder mapping uses the power/interest grid framework. RESULTS: The informal discussion with key stakeholders generated six initial policy questions. Further discussions with policy-makers yielded three suitable policy questions for analysis: which COVID-19 vaccines should be bought; what is the optimal mode of delivery of these vaccines; and what are the cost and cost-effectiveness of vaccinating people highlighted in Nigeria's phase 2 vaccine rollout prioritized by the government, especially the inclusion of those aged between 18 and 49 years. The stakeholder mapping exercise highlighted the range of organizations and groups within Nigeria that could use the information from this HTA to guide decision-making. These stakeholders included both public/government, private and international organizations The dissemination plan developed included disseminating the full HTA results to key stakeholders; production of policy briefs; and presentation at different national and international conferences and peer-reviewed publications. CONCLUSIONS: HTA processes that involve stakeholder engagement will help ensure important policy questions are taken into account when designing any HTA including any underpinning evidence generation. Further guidance about stakeholder engagement throughout HTA is required, especially for those with low interest in vaccine procurement and use.

Pakistan's Progress on Universal Health Coverage: Lessons Learned in Priority Setting and Challenges Ahead in Reinforcing Primary Healthcare.

Pakistan developed an essential package of health services at the primary health care level as a key component of health reforms aiming to achieve universal health coverage. This supplement describes the methods and processes adopted for evidence-informed prioritization of services, policy decisions adopted, and the lessons learned in package design as well as in the transition to effective rollout. The papers conclude that evidenceinformed deliberative processes can be effectively applied to design affordable packages of services that represent good value for money and address a major part of the disease burden. Transition to implementation requires a comprehensive assessment of health system gaps, strong engagement of the planning and financing sectors, serious involvement of key national stakeholders and the private health sector, capacity building, and institutionalization of technical and managerial skills. Pakistan's experience highlights the need for updating the evidence and model packages of the Disease Control Priorities 3 initiative and reinforcing international collaboration to support technical guidance to countries in priority setting and UHC reforms.

The Use of Evidence to Design an Essential Package of Health Services in Pakistan: A Review and Analysis of Prioritisation Decisions at Different Stages of the Appraisal Process.

BACKGROUND: Pakistan embarked on a process of designing an essential package of health services (EPHS) as a pathway towards universal health coverage (UHC). The EPHS design followed an evidence-informed deliberative process; evidence on 170 interventions was introduced along multiple stages of appraisal engaging different stakeholders tasked with prioritising interventions for inclusion. We report on the composition of the package at different stages, analyse trends of prioritised and deprioritised interventions and reflect on the trade-offs made. METHODS: Quantitative evidence on cost-effectiveness, budget impact, and avoidable burden of disease was presented to stakeholders in stages. We recorded which interventions were prioritised and deprioritised at each stage and carried out three analyses: (1) a review of total number of interventions prioritised at each stage, along with associated costs per capita and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted, to understand changes in affordability and efficiency in the package, (2) an analysis of interventions broken down by decision criteria and intervention characteristics to analyse prioritisation trends across different stages, and (3) a description of the trajectory of interventions broken down by current coverage and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: Value for money generally increased throughout the process, although not uniformly. Stakeholders largely prioritised interventions with low budget impact and those preventing a high burden of disease. Highly cost-effective interventions were also prioritised, but less consistently throughout the stages of the process. Interventions with high current coverage were overwhelmingly prioritised for inclusion. CONCLUSION: Evidence-informed deliberative processes can produce actionable and affordable health benefit packages. While cost-effective interventions are generally preferred, other factors play a role and limit efficiency.

Costing Interventions for Developing an Essential Package of Health Services: Application of a Rapid Method and Results From Pakistan.

BACKGROUND: The Federal Ministry of National Health Services, Regulations and Coordination (MNHSR&C) in Pakistan has committed to progress towards universal health coverage (UHC) by 2030 by providing an Essential Package of Health Services (EPHS). Starting in 2019, the Disease Control Priorities 3rd edition (DCP3) evidence framework was used to guide the development of Pakistan's EPHS. In this paper, we describe the methods and results of a rapid costing approach used to inform the EPHS design process. METHODS: A total of 167 unit costs were calculated through a context-specific, normative, ingredients-based, and bottom-up economic costing approach. Costs were constructed by determining resource use from descriptions provided by MNHSR&C and validated by technical experts. Price data from publicly available sources were used. Deterministic univariate sensitivity analyses were carried out. RESULTS: Unit costs ranged from 2019 US$ 0.27 to 2019 US$ 1478. Interventions in the cancer package of services had the highest average cost (2019 US$ 837) while interventions in the environmental package of services had the lowest (2019 US$ 0.68). Cost drivers varied by platform; the two largest drivers were drug regimens and surgery-related costs. Sensitivity analyses suggest our results are not sensitive to changes in staff salary but are sensitive to changes in medicine pricing. CONCLUSION: We estimated a large number of context-specific unit costs, over a six-month period, demonstrating a rapid costing method suitable for EPHS design.

Catastrophic costs for tuberculosis patients in India: Impact of methodological choices.

As financial risk protection is one of the goals towards universal health coverage, detailed information on costs, catastrophic costs and other economic consequences related to any disease are required for designing social protection measures. End Tuberculosis (TB) Strategy set a milestone of achieving zero catastrophic cost by 2020. However, a recent literature review noted that 7%-32% TB affected households in India faced catastrophic cost. Studies included in the review were small scale cross-sectional. We followed a cohort of 1482 notified drug-susceptible TB patients from four states in India: Assam, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, and West Bengal to provide a comprehensive picture of economic burden associated with TB treatment. Treatment cost was calculated using World Health Organization guidelines on TB patient cost survey and both human capital and output approaches of indirect cost (time, productivity, and income loss related to an episode) calculation were used to provide the range of households currently facing catastrophic cost. Depending on choice of indirect cost calculation method, 30%-61% study participants faced catastrophic cost. For over half of them, costs became catastrophic even before starting TB treatment as there was average 7-9 weeks delay from symptom onset to treatment initiation which was double the generally accepted delay of 4 weeks. During that period, they made average 8-11 visits to different providers and spent money on consultations, drugs, tests, and travel. Following the largest cohort of drug-susceptible TB patients till date, the study concluded that a significant proportion of study participants faced catastrophic cost and the proportion was much higher when income loss was considered as indirect cost calculation method. Therefore, ensuring uninterrupted livelihood during TB treatment is an absolute necessity. Another reason of high cost was the delay in diagnosis and costs incurred during pre-diagnosis period. This delay and consequently, economic burden, can be reduced by both supply side (intense private sector engagement, rapid diagnosis) and demand side (community engagement) initiatives. Reimbursement of expenses incurred before treatment initiation could be used as short-term measure for mitigating financial hardship.

Factors associated with tuberculosis treatment initiation among bacteriologically negative individuals evaluated for tuberculosis: an individual patient data meta-analysis.

Background: Globally, over one-third of pulmonary tuberculosis (TB) disease diagnoses are made based on clinical criteria after a negative diagnostic test result. Understanding factors associated with clinicians' decisions to initiate treatment for individuals with negative test results is critical for predicting the potential impact of new diagnostics. Methods: We performed a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis using studies conducted between January/2010 and December/2022 (PROSPERO: CRD42022287613). We included trials or cohort studies that enrolled individuals evaluated for TB in routine settings. In these studies participants were evaluated based on clinical examination and routinely-used diagnostics, and were followed for ≥1 week after the initial test result. We used hierarchical Bayesian logistic regression to identify factors associated with treatment initiation following a negative result on an initial bacteriological test (e.g., sputum smear microscopy, Xpert MTB/RIF). Findings: Multiple factors were positively associated with treatment initiation: male sex [adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) 1.61 (1.31-1.95)], history of prior TB [aOR 1.36 (1.06-1.73)], reported cough [aOR 4.62 (3.42-6.27)], reported night sweats [aOR 1.50 (1.21-1.90)], and having HIV infection but not on ART [aOR 1.68 (1.23-2.32)]. Treatment initiation was substantially less likely for individuals testing negative with Xpert [aOR 0.77 (0.62-0.96)] compared to smear microscopy and declined in more recent years. Interpretation: Multiple factors influenced decisions to initiate TB treatment despite negative test results. Clinicians were substantially less likely to treat in the absence of a positive test result when using more sensitive, PCR-based diagnostics.

"Going into the black box": a policy analysis of how the World Health Organization uses evidence to inform guideline recommendations.

Background: The World Health Organization (WHO) plays a crucial role in producing global guidelines. In response to previous criticism, WHO has made efforts to enhance the process of guideline development, aiming for greater systematicity and transparency. However, it remains unclear whether these changes have effectively addressed these earlier critiques. This paper examines the policy process employed by WHO to inform guideline recommendations, using the update of the WHO Consolidated HIV Testing Services (HTS) Guidelines as a case study. Methods: We observed guideline development meetings and conducted semi-structured interviews with key participants involved in the WHO guideline-making process. The interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analysed thematically. The data were deductively coded and analysed in line with the main themes from a published conceptual framework for context-based evidence-based decision making: introduction, interpretation, and application of evidence. Results: The HTS guideline update was characterized by an inclusive and transparent process, involving a wide range of stakeholders. However, it was noted that not all stakeholders could participate equally due to gaps in training and preparation, particularly regarding the complexity of the Grading Recommendations Assessment Development Evaluation (GRADE) framework. We also found that WHO does not set priorities for which or how many guidelines should be produced each year and does not systematically evaluate the implementation of their recommendations. Our interviews revealed disconnects in the evidence synthesis process, starting from the development of systematic review protocols. While GRADE prioritizes evidence from RCTs, the Guideline Development Group (GDG) heavily emphasized "other" GRADE domains for which little or no evidence was available from the systematic reviews. As a result, expert judgements and opinions played a role in making recommendations. Finally, the role of donors and their presence as observers during GDG meetings was not clearly defined. Conclusion: We found a need for a different approach to evidence synthesis due to the diverse range of global guidelines produced by WHO. Ideally, the evidence synthesis should be broad enough to capture evidence from different types of studies for all domains in the GRADE framework. Greater structure is required in formulating GDGs and clarifying the role of donors through the process.

The epidemiological and economic burden of diabetes in Ghana: A scoping review to inform health technology assessment.

Diabetes remains one of the four major causes of morbidity and mortality globally among non-communicable diseases (NCDs. It is predicted to increase in sub-Saharan Africa by over 50% by 2045. The aim of this study is to identify, map and estimate the burden of diabetes in Ghana, which is essential for optimising NCD country policy and understanding existing knowledge gaps to guide future research in this area. We followed the Arksey and O'Malley framework for scoping reviews. We searched electronic databases including Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane and African Index Medicus following a systematic search strategy. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews was followed when reporting the results. A total of 36 studies were found to fulfil the inclusion criteria. The reported prevalence of diabetes at national level in Ghana ranged between 2.80%- 3.95%. At the regional level, the Western region reported the highest prevalence of diabetes: 39.80%, followed by Ashanti region (25.20%) and Central region at 24.60%. The prevalence of diabetes was generally higher in women in comparison to men. Urban areas were found to have a higher prevalence of diabetes than rural areas. The mean annual financial cost of managing one diabetic case at the outpatient clinic was estimated at GHS 540.35 (2021 US $194.09). There was a paucity of evidence on the overall economic burden and the regional prevalence burden. Ghana is faced with a considerable burden of diabetes which varies by region and setting (urban/rural). There is an urgent need for effective and efficient interventions to prevent the anticipated elevation in burden of disease through the utilisation of existing evidence and proven priority-setting tools like Health Technology Assessment (HTA).

Comparing disease specific catastrophic cost estimates using longitudinal and cross-sectional designs: The example of tuberculosis.

BACKGROUND: There has been an increasing interest in assessing disease-specific catastrophic costs incurred by affected households as part of economic evaluations and to inform joint social/health policies for vulnerable groups. Although the longitudinal study design is the gold standard for estimating disease-specific household costs, many assessments are implemented with a cross-sectional design for pragmatic reasons. We aimed at identifying the potential biases of a cross-sectional design for estimating household cost, using the example of tuberculosis (TB), and exploring optimal approaches for sampling and interpolating cross-sectional cost data to estimate household costs. METHODS: Data on patient incurred costs, household income and coping strategies were collected from TB patients in Negros Occidental and Cebu in the Philippines between November 2018 and October 2020. The data collection tools were developed by adapting WHO Tuberculosis Patient Cost Surveys: A Handbook into a longitudinal study design. TB-specific catastrophic cost estimates were compared between longitudinal and simulated cross-sectional designs using different random samples from different times points in treatment (intensive and continuation phases). RESULTS: A total of 530 adult TB patients were enrolled upon TB diagnosis in this study. Using the longitudinal design, the catastrophic cost estimate for TB-affected households was 69 % using the output approach. The catastrophic cost estimates with the simulated cross-sectional design were affected by the reduction and recovery in household income during the episode of TB care and ranged from 40 to 55 %. CONCLUSION: Using longitudinally collected costs incurred by TB-affected households, we illustrated the potential limitations and implications of estimating household costs using a cross-sectional design. Not capturing changes in household income at multiple time points during the episode of the disease and estimating from inappropriate samples may result in biases that underestimates catastrophic cost.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a transdiagnostic intervention for alcohol misuse and psychological distress in humanitarian settings: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial in Uganda.

BACKGROUND: The war in South Sudan has displaced more than four million people, with Uganda hosting the largest number of South Sudanese refugees. Research in Uganda has shown elevated levels of alcohol misuse and psychological distress among these refugees. The World Health Organization (WHO) has developed a trans-diagnostic scalable psychological intervention called Problem Management Plus (PM +) to reduce psychological distress among populations exposed to adversities. Our study aims to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the CHANGE intervention, which builds on PM + , to also address alcohol misuse through problem-solving therapy and selected behavioural strategies for dealing with alcohol use disorders. We hypothesise that the CHANGE intervention together with enhanced usual care (EUC) will be superior to EUC alone in increasing the percentage of days abstinent. METHODS: A parallel-arm individually randomised controlled trial will be conducted in the Rhino Camp and Imvepi settlements in Uganda. Five hundred adult male South Sudanese refugees with (i) elevated levels of alcohol use (between 8 and 20 on the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test [AUDIT]); and (ii) psychological distress (> 16 on the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale) will be randomly assigned 1:1 to EUC or CHANGE and EUC. CHANGE will be delivered by lay healthcare providers over 6 weeks. Outcomes will be assessed at 3 and 12 months post-randomisation. The primary outcome is the percentage of days abstinent, measured by the timeline follow-back measure at 3 months. Secondary outcomes include percentage of days abstinent at 12 months and alcohol misuse (measured by the AUDIT), psychological distress (i.e. depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder), functional disability, perpetration of intimate partner violence, and health economic indicators at 3 and 12 months. A mixed-methods process evaluation will investigate competency, dose, fidelity, feasibility, and acceptability. Primary analyses will be intention-to-treat. DISCUSSION: CHANGE aims to address alcohol misuse and psychological distress with male refugees in a humanitarian setting. If it is proven to be effective, it can help fill an important under-researched gap in humanitarian service delivery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN ISRCTN10360385. Registered on 30 January 2023.

Costs incurred by people with co-morbid tuberculosis and diabetes and their households in the Philippines.

OBJECTIVE: Diabetes is a risk factor for TB mortality and relapse. The Philippines has a high TB incidence with co-morbid diabetes. This study assessed the pre- and post-TB diagnosis costs incurred by people with TB and diabetes (TB-DM) and their households in the Philippines. METHODS: Longitudinal data was collected for costs, income, and coping mechanisms of TB-affected households in Negros Occidental and Cebu, the Philippines. Data collection was conducted four times during TB treatment. The data collection tools were developed by adapting WHO's cross-sectional questionnaire in the Tuberculosis Patient Cost Surveys: A Handbook into a longitudinal study design. Demographic and clinical characteristics, self-reported household income, number of facility visits, patient costs, the proportion of TB-affected households facing catastrophic costs due to TB (>20% of annual household income before TB), coping mechanisms, and social support received were compared by diabetes status at the time of TB diagnosis. RESULTS: 530 people with TB were enrolled in this study, and 144 (27.2%) had TB-DM based on diabetes testing at the time of TB diagnosis. 75.4% of people with TB-DM were more than 45 years old compared to 50.3% of people with TB-only (p<0.001). People with TB-DM had more frequent visits for TB treatment (120 vs 87 visits, p = 0.054) as well as for total visits for TB-DM treatment (129 vs 88 visits, p = 0.010) compared to those with TB-only. There was no significant difference in the proportion of TB-affected households facing catastrophic costs between those with TB-DM (76.3%) and those with TB-only (68.7%, p = 0.691). CONCLUSION: People with TB-DM in the Philippines face extensive health service use. However, this does not translate into substantial differences in the incidence of catastrophic cost. Further study is required to understand the incidence of catastrophic costs due to diabetes-only in the Philippines.

A Scoping Review and Taxonomy of Epidemiological-Macroeconomic Models of COVID-19.

OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 pandemic placed significant strain on many health systems and economies. Mitigation policies decreased health impacts but had major macroeconomic impact. This article reviews models combining epidemiological and macroeconomic projections to enable policy makers to consider both macroeconomic and health objectives. METHODS: A scoping review of epidemiological-macroeconomic models of COVID-19 was conducted, covering preprints, working articles, and journal publications. We assessed model methodologies, scope, and application to empirical data. RESULTS: We found 80 articles modeling both the epidemiological and macroeconomic outcomes of COVID-19. Model scope is often limited to the impact of lockdown on health and total gross domestic product or aggregate consumption and to high-income countries. Just 14% of models assess disparities or poverty. Most models fall under 4 categories: compartmental-utility-maximization models, epidemiological models with stylized macroeconomic projections, epidemiological models linked to computable general equilibrium or input-output models, and epidemiological-economic agent-based models. We propose a taxonomy comparing these approaches to guide future model development. CONCLUSIONS: The epidemiological-macroeconomic models of COVID-19 identified have varying complexity and meet different modeling needs. Priorities for future modeling include increasing developing country applications, assessing disparities and poverty, and estimating of long-run impacts. This may require better integration between epidemiologists and economists.

Ending TB in South-East Asia: flagship priority and response transformation.

Over the decades, the global tuberculosis (TB) response has evolved from sanatoria-based treatment to DOTS (Directly Observed Therapy Shortcourse) strategy and the more recent End TB Strategy. The WHO South-East Asia Region, which accounted for 45% of new TB patients and 50% of deaths globally in 2021, is pivotal to the global fight against TB. "Accelerate Efforts to End TB" by 2030 was adopted as a South-East Asia Regional Flagship Priority (RFP) in 2017. This article illustrates intensified and transformed approaches to address the disease burden following the adoption of RFP and new challenges that emerged during the COVID-19 pandemic. TB case notifications improved by 25% and treatment success rates improved by 6% between 2016 and 2019 due to interventions ranging from galvanising political commitments to empowering and engaging communities. Cumulative TB programme budget allocations in 2022 reached US$ 1.4 billion, about two and a half times the budget in 2016. An ambitious Regional Strategic Plan towards ending TB, 2021-2025, identifies priority interventions that will need investments of up to US$ 3 billion a year to fully implement them. Moving forward, countries in the Region need to leverage RFP and take up intensified, people-centred, holistic interventions for prevention, diagnosis, treatment and care of TB with commensurate investments and cross-ministerial and multi-sectoral coordination.

"We usually see a lot of delay in terms of coming for or seeking care": an expert consultation on COVID testing and care pathways in seven low- and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Rapid diagnostic testing may support improved treatment of COVID patients. Understanding COVID testing and care pathways is important for assessing the impact and cost-effectiveness of testing in the real world, yet there is limited information on these pathways in low-and-middle income countries (LMICs). We therefore undertook an expert consultation to better understand testing policies and practices, clinical screening, the profile of patients seeking testing or care, linkage to care after testing, treatment, lessons learnt and expected changes in 2023. METHODS: We organized a qualitative consultation with ten experts from seven LMICs (India, Indonesia, Malawi, Nigeria, Peru, South Africa, and Zimbabwe) identified through purposive sampling. We conducted structured interviews during six regional consultations, and undertook a thematic analysis of responses. RESULTS: Participants reported that, after initial efforts to scale-up testing, the policy priority given to COVID testing has declined. Comorbidities putting patients at heightened risk (e.g., diabetes) mainly relied on self-identification. The decision to test following clinical screening was highly context-/location-specific, often dictated by local epidemiology and test availability. When rapid diagnostic tests were available, public sector healthcare providers tended to rely on them for diagnosis (alongside PCR for Asian/Latin American participants), while private sector providers predominantly used polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests. Positive test results were generally taken at 'face value' by clinicians, although negative tests with a high index of suspicion may be confirmed with PCR. However, even with a positive result, patients were not always linked to care in a timely manner because of reluctance to receiving care or delays in returning to care centres upon clinical deterioration. Countries often lacked multiple components of the range of therapeutics advised in WHO guidelines: notably so for oral antivirals designed for high-risk mild patients. Severely ill patients mostly received corticosteroids and, in higher-resourced settings, tocilizumab. CONCLUSIONS: Testing does not always prompt enhanced care, due to reluctance on the part of patients and limited therapeutic availability within clinical settings. Any analysis of the impact or cost-effectiveness of testing policies post pandemic needs to either consider investment in optimal treatment pathways or constrain estimates of benefits based on actual practice.

The use of cost-effectiveness analysis for health benefit package design - should countries follow a sectoral, incremental or hybrid approach?

BACKGROUND: Countries around the world are increasingly rethinking the design of their health benefit package to achieve universal health coverage. Countries can periodically revise their packages on the basis of sectoral cost-effectiveness analyses, i.e. by evaluating a broad set of services against a 'doing nothing' scenario using a budget constraint. Alternatively, they can use incremental cost-effectiveness analyses, i.e. to evaluate specific services against current practice using a threshold. In addition, countries may employ hybrid approaches which combines elements of sectoral and incremental cost-effectiveness analysis - a country may e.g. not evaluate the comprehensive set of all services but rather relatively small sets of services targeting a certain condition. However, there is little practical guidance for countries as to which kind of approach they should follow. METHODS: The present study was based on expert consultation. We refined the typology of approaches of cost-effectiveness analysis for benefit package design, identified factors that should be considered in the choice of approach, and developed recommendations. We reached consensus among experts over the course of several review rounds. RESULTS: Sectoral cost-effectiveness analysis is especially suited in contexts with large allocative inefficiencies in current service provision and can, in theory, realize large efficiency gains. However, it may be challenging to implement a comprehensive redesign of the package in practice. Incremental cost-effectiveness analysis is especially relevant in contexts where specific new services may impact the sustainability of the health system. It may potentially support efficiency improvement, but its focus has typically been on new services while existing inefficiencies remain unchallenged. The use of hybrid approach may be a way forward to address the strengths and weaknesses of sectoral and incremental analysis areas. Such analysis may be especially useful to target disease areas with suspected high inefficiencies in service provision, and would then make good use of the available research capacity and be politically rewarding. However, disease-specific analyses bear the risk of not addressing resource allocation inefficiencies across disease areas. CONCLUSIONS: Countries should carefully select their approach of cost-effectiveness analyses for benefit package design, based on their decision-making context.

"We usually see a lot of delay in terms of coming for or seeking care": an expert consultation on COVID testing and care pathways in low- and middle-income countries.

Background: Rapid diagnostic testing may support improved treatment of COVID patients. Understanding COVID testing and care pathways is important for assessing the impact and cost-effectiveness of testing in the real world, yet there is limited information on these pathways in low-and-middle income countries (LMICs). We therefore undertook an expert consultation to better understand testing policies and practices, clinical screening, the profile of patients seeking testing or care, linkage to care after testing, treatment, lessons learnt and expected changes in 2023 in LMICs. Methods: We organized a qualitative consultation with ten experts from seven LMICs identified through purposive sampling. We conducted structured interviews during six regional consultations, and undertook a thematic analysis of the responses to our questions. Results: Participants reported that, after initial efforts to scale-up testing (which often encountered delays), the policy priority given to COVID testing has declined. Comorbidities putting patients at heightened risk (e.g., diabetes) mainly relied on self-identification. The decision to test following clinical screening was highly context- and location-specific, often dictated by local epidemiology and test availability. When rapid diagnostic tests were available, public sector healthcare providers tended to rely on them for diagnosis, while private sector providers predominantly used polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests. Positive test results were generally taken at 'face value' by clinicians, although negative tests with a high index of suspicion may be confirmed with PCR. However, even with a positive result, patients were not always linked to care in a timely manner because of reluctance to receiving care or delays in returning to care centres upon clinical deterioration. Countries often lacked multiple components of the range of therapeutics advised in WHO guidelines: notably so for oral antivirals designed for high-risk mild patients. Severely ill patients mostly received corticosteroids and, in higher-resourced settings, tocilizumab. Conclusions: Testing does not always prompt enhanced care, due to reluctance on the part of patients and limited therapeutic availability within clinical settings. Any analysis of the impact or cost-effectiveness of testing policies post pandemic needs to either consider investment in optimal treatment pathways or constrain estimates of benefits based on actual practice.

Health technology assessment (HTA) readiness in Uganda: stakeholder's perceptions on the potential application of HTA to support national universal health coverage efforts.

INTRODUCTION: Health technology assessment (HTA) is an area that remains less implemented in low- and lower middle-income countries. The aim of the study is to understand the perceptions of stakeholders in Uganda toward HTA and its role in decision making, in order to inform its potential implementation in the country. METHODS: The study takes a cross-sectional mixed methods approach, utilizing an adapted version of the International Decision Support Initiative questionnaire with both semi-structured and open-ended questions. We interviewed thirty key informants from different stakeholder institutions in Uganda that support policy and decision making in the health sector. RESULTS: All participants perceived HTA as an important tool for decision making. Allocative efficiency was regarded as the most important use of HTA receiving the highest average score (8.8 out of 10), followed by quality of healthcare (7.8/10), transparency (7.6/10), budget control (7.5/10), and equity (6.5/10). There was concern that some of the uses of HTA may not be achieved in reality if there was political interference during the HTA process. The study participants identified development partners as the most likely potential users of HTA (66.7 percent of participants), followed by Ministry of Health (43.3 percent). CONCLUSION: Interviewed stakeholders in Uganda viewed the role of HTA positively, suggesting that there exists a promising environment for the establishment and operationalization of HTA as a tool for decision making within the health sector. However, sustainable development and application of HTA in Uganda will require adequate capacity both to undertake HTAs and to support their use and uptake.