A meta-analysis approach for estimating average unit costs for ART using pooled facility-level primary data from African countries.

Objective: To estimate facility-level average cost for ART services and explore unit cost variations using pooled facility-level cost estimates from four HIV empirical cost studies conducted in five African countries .Methods: Through a literature search we identified studies reporting facility-level costs for ART programmes. We requested the underlying data and standardised the disparate data sources to make them comparable. Subsequently, we estimated the annual cost per patient served and assessed the cost variation among facilities and other service delivery characteristics using descriptive statistics and meta-analysis. All costs were converted to 2017 US dollars ($). Results: We obtained and standardised data from four studies across five African countries and 139 facilities. The weighted average cost per patient on ART was $251 (95% CI: 193-308). On average, 46% of the mean unit cost correspond to antiretroviral (ARVs) costs, 31% to personnel costs, 20% other recurrent costs, and 2% to capital costs. We observed a lot of variation in unit cost and scale levels between countries. We also observed a negative relationship between ART unit cost and the number of patients served in a year.Conclusion: Our approach allowed us to explore unit cost variation across contexts by pooling ART costs from multiple sources. Our research provides an example of how to estimate costs based on heterogeneous sources reconciling methodological differences across studies and contributes by giving an example on how to estimate costs based on heterogeneous sources of data. Also, our study provides additional information on costs for funders, policy-makers, and decision-makers in the process of designing or scaling-up HIV interventions.

HIV prevention costs and program scale: data from the PANCEA project in five low and middle-income countries.

BACKGROUND: Economic theory and limited empirical data suggest that costs per unit of HIV prevention program output (unit costs) will initially decrease as small programs expand. Unit costs may then reach a nadir and start to increase if expansion continues beyond the economically optimal size. Information on the relationship between scale and unit costs is critical to project the cost of global HIV prevention efforts and to allocate prevention resources efficiently. METHODS: The "Prevent AIDS: Network for Cost-Effectiveness Analysis" (PANCEA) project collected 2003 and 2004 cost and output data from 206 HIV prevention programs of six types in five countries. The association between scale and efficiency for each intervention type was examined for each country. Our team characterized the direction, shape, and strength of this association by fitting bivariate regression lines to scatter plots of output levels and unit costs. We chose the regression forms with the highest explanatory power (R2). RESULTS: Efficiency increased with scale, across all countries and interventions. This association varied within intervention and within country, in terms of the range in scale and efficiency, the best fitting regression form, and the slope of the regression. The fraction of variation in efficiency explained by scale ranged from 26-96%. Doubling in scale resulted in reductions in unit costs averaging 34.2% (ranging from 2.4% to 58.0%). Two regression trends, in India, suggested an inflection point beyond which unit costs increased. CONCLUSION: Unit costs decrease with scale across a wide range of service types and volumes. These country and intervention-specific findings can inform projections of the global cost of scaling up HIV prevention efforts.