Cost of improved test and treat strategies in Indonesia.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate and compare the cost of improved test and treat strategies in Indonesia under HIV Awal (Early) Testing and Treatment Indonesia (HATI) implementation trial in community-based and hospital-based clinics. DESIGN: The cost and outcome [i.e. CD4 + cell count] and viral load (VL) at the beginning of interventions and their change overtime) analysis of Simplifying ART Initiation (SAI), Community-based Organization and community-based ART Service (CBO), Motivational Interviewing (MI), Oral Fluid-based Testing (OFT), and Short Message Service (SMS) reminder in community-based and hospital-based clinics in 2018-2019. METHOD: We estimated the total and unit costs per patient (under HATI implementation trial interventions) per year from societal perspective in various settings, including costs from patients' perspective for SAI and MI. We also analyzed the outcome variables (i.e. CD4 + cell count and VL at the beginning of each intervention, the change in CD4 + cell count and VL over time, and adherence rate). RESULT: The unit cost per patient per year of SAI and SMS were lower at the community-based clinics, and more patients visited community-based clinics. The cost per patient visit from patient perspective for SAI and MI was mostly lower than 10% of the patients' household monthly expenditure. Average CD4 + cell count was higher and average VL was lower at the start of interventions at the community-based clinics, while average CD4 + cell count and VL changes and adherence rate were similar between the two types of clinics. CONCLUSION: Community-based clinics hold the potential for scaling up the interventions as it costs less from societal perspective and showed better outcome improvement during the HATI implementation trial.

The cost of providing hospital-based (early) antiretroviral treatment in Indonesia: what has changed in almost a decade?

17% of all people living with HIV in Indonesia who are in need of antiretroviral treatment (ART) actually receive the treatment. The cost of ART based on three CD4 cell count groups (e.g., 0-200, 201-350, >350 cells/mm3) in a main referral hospital in West Java, Indonesia, in 2011-2016 was compared to the results from a decade earlier in the same setting. Costs were estimated including resources used for opportunistic infection treatment, laboratory tests, and antiretroviral (ARV) drugs. For each group, we divided the costs into several periods: pre-ART, and every 6 months up to 24 months after onset of treatment. Before ART, costs were dominated by laboratory tests (>80%); ARV drugs were the main cost after treatment onset (>92%). Average cost of treatment per year was US$600 across all groups. Moreover, the patient cost to access ART (n = 49 patients) did not exceed 10% of their household monthly expenditures (i.e., 4%). The unit cost of providing ART per patient/year is half the cost under the previous treatment initiation guidelines. A lower ARV drug cost, more patients in higher CD4 cell-count groups, and lower viral load test cost characterize the current cost profile.

Prioritizing HIV/AIDS prevention strategies in Bandung, Indonesia: A cost analysis of three different HIV/AIDS interventions.

BACKGROUND: Indonesia has one of the fastest growing HIV epidemics in Asia, which mainly concentrates within risk groups. Several strategies are available to combat this epidemic, like outreach to Men who have Sex with Men (MSM) and transgender, Harm Reduction Community Meetings (HRCMs) for Injecting Drug Users (IDUs), and Information, Education and Communication (IEC) programs at Maternal & Child Health Posts (MCHPs). Reliable cost data are currently not present, hampering HIV/AIDS priority setting. The aim of this study thus is to assess the societal costs of outreach programs to MSM and transgender, HRCMs for IDUs and IEC at MCHPs in Bandung, Indonesia in 2016. METHODS: The societal costs were collected in Bandung from April until May 2017. Health care costs were collected by interviewing stakeholders, using a micro-costing approach. Non-health care costs were determined by conducting surveys within the target groups of the interventions. RESULTS: The societal costs of the outreach program were US$ 347,199.03 in 2016 and US$ 73.72 per reached individual. Moreover, the cost of HRCM for IDUs were US$ 48,618.31 in 2016 and US$ 365.55 per community meeting. For the IEC program at MCHPs, US$ 337.13 was paid in 2016 and the cost per visitor were US$ 0.51. CONCLUSION: This study provides valuable insights in the costs of outreach to MSM and transgender, HRCMs for IDUs and IEC at MCHPs. Policy makers can use these results in setting priorities within Indonesia. Data on effectiveness of interventions is necessary to make conclusive statements regarding cost-effectiveness and priority of interventions.

Translating international HIV treatment guidelines into local priorities in Indonesia.

OBJECTIVE: International guidelines recommend countries to expand antiretroviral therapy (ART) to all HIV-infected individuals and establish local-level priorities in relation to other treatment, prevention and mitigation interventions through fair processes. However, no practical guidance is provided for such priority-setting processes. Evidence-informed deliberative processes (EDPs) fill this gap and combine stakeholder deliberation to incorporate relevant social values with rational decision-making informed by evidence on these values. This study reports on the first-time implementation and evaluation of an EDP in HIV control, organised to support the AIDS Commission in West Java province, Indonesia, in the development of its strategic plan for 2014-2018. METHODS: Under the responsibility of the provincial AIDS Commission, an EDP was implemented to select priority interventions using six steps: (i) situational analysis; (ii) formation of a multistakeholder Consultation Panel; (iii) selection of criteria; (iv) identification and assessment of interventions' performance; (v) deliberation; and (vi) selection of funding and implementing institutions. An independent researcher conducted in-depth interviews (n = 21) with panel members to evaluate the process. RESULTS: The Consultation Panel included 23 stakeholders. They identified 50 interventions and these were evaluated against four criteria: impact on the epidemic, stigma reduction, cost-effectiveness and universal coverage. After a deliberative discussion, the Consultation Panel prioritised a combination of several treatment, prevention and mitigation interventions. CONCLUSION: The EDP improved both stakeholder involvement and the evidence base for the strategic planning process. EDPs fill an important gap which international guidelines and current tools for strategic planning in HIV control leave unaddressed.

Priority setting in HIV/AIDS control in West Java Indonesia: an evaluation based on the accountability for reasonableness framework.

BACKGROUND: Indonesia has insufficient resources to adequately respond to the HIV/AIDS epidemic, and thus faces a great challenge in prioritizing interventions. In many countries, such priority setting processes are typically ad hoc and not transparent leading to unfair decisions. Here, we evaluated the priority setting process in HIV/AIDS control in West Java province against the four conditions of the accountability for reasonableness (A4R) framework: relevance, publicity, appeals and revision, and enforcement. METHODS: We reviewed government documents and conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews based on the A4R framework with 22 participants of the 5-year HIV/AIDS strategy development for 2008-13 (West Java province) and 2007-11 (Bandung). RESULTS: We found that criteria for priority setting were used implicitly and that the strategies included a wide range of programmes. Many stakeholders were involved in the process but their contribution could be improved and particularly the public and people living with HIV/AIDS could be better engaged. The use of appeal and publicity mechanisms could be more transparent and formally stated. Public regulations are not yet installed to ensure fair priority setting. CONCLUSIONS: To increase fairness in HIV/AIDS priority setting, West Java should make improvements on all four conditions of the A4R framework.

IMPORTANCE OF MULTIPLE CRITERIA FOR PRIORITY SETTING OF HIV/AIDS INTERVENTIONS.

OBJECTIVES: This study describes the views of various stakeholders on the importance of different criteria for priority setting of HIV/AIDS interventions in Indonesia. METHODS: Based on a general list of criteria and a focus group discussion with stakeholders (n = 6), a list was developed of thirty-two criteria that play a role in priority setting in HIV/AIDS control in West-Java province. Criteria were categorized according to the World Health Organization's health system goals and building block frameworks. People living with HIV/AIDS (n = 49), healthcare workers (HCW) (n = 41), the general population (n = 43), and policy makers (n = 22) rated the importance of thirty-two criteria on a 5-point Likert-scale. Thereafter, respondents ranked the highest rated criteria to express more detailed preferences. RESULTS: Stakeholders valued the following criteria as most important for the priority setting of HIV/AIDS interventions: an intervention's impact on the HIV/AIDS epidemic, reduction of stigma, quality of care, effectiveness on individual level, and feasibility in terms of current capacity of the health system (i.e., HCW, product, information, and service requirements), financial sustainability, and acceptance by donors. Overall, stakeholders' preferences for the importance of criteria are similar. CONCLUSIONS: Our study design outlines an approach for other settings to identify which criteria are important for priority setting of health interventions. For Indonesia, these study results may be used in priority setting processes for HIV/AIDS control and may contribute to more transparent and systematic allocation of resources.