Costing and cost-effectiveness of Cepheid Xpert HIV -1 Qual Assay using whole blood protocol versus PCR by Abbott Systems in Malawi.

Journal of global health economics and policy Pub Date : 2022-01-01 Epub Date: 2022-08-28 DOI:10.52872/001c.37787
Maggie Nyirenda-Nyang'wa, Gerald Manthalu, Matthias Arnold, Dominic Nkhoma, Mina C Hosseinipour, Maganizo Chagomerana, Precious Chibwe, Kevin Mortimer, Neil Kennedy, Derek Fairley, Victor Mwapasa, Chisomo Msefula, Henry C Mwandumba, Jobiba Chinkhumba, Nigel Klein, Dagmar Alber, Angela Obasi
{"title":"Costing and cost-effectiveness of Cepheid Xpert HIV -1 Qual Assay using whole blood protocol versus PCR by Abbott Systems in Malawi.","authors":"Maggie Nyirenda-Nyang'wa, Gerald Manthalu, Matthias Arnold, Dominic Nkhoma, Mina C Hosseinipour, Maganizo Chagomerana, Precious Chibwe, Kevin Mortimer, Neil Kennedy, Derek Fairley, Victor Mwapasa, Chisomo Msefula, Henry C Mwandumba, Jobiba Chinkhumba, Nigel Klein, Dagmar Alber, Angela Obasi","doi":"10.52872/001c.37787","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Timely diagnosis of HIV in infants and children is an urgent priority. In Malawi, 40,000 infants annually are HIV exposed. However, gold standard polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR) based testing requires centralised laboratories, causing turn-around times (TAT) of 2 to 3 months and significant loss to follow-up. If feasible and acceptable, minimising diagnostic delays through HIV Point-of-care-testing (POCT) may be cost-effective. We assessed whether POCT Cepheid Xpert HIV-1 Qual assay whole blood (XpertHIV) was more cost-effective than PCR.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From July-August 2018, 700 PCR Abbott tests using dried blood spots (DBS) were performed on 680 participants who enrolled on the feasibility, acceptability and performance of the XpertHIV study. Newly identified HIV-positive We conducted a cost-minimisation and cost-effectiveness analysis of XpertHIV against PCR, as the standard of care. A random sample of 200 caregivers from the 680 participants had semi-structured interviews to explore costs from a societal perspective of XpertHIV at Mulanje District Hospital, Malawi. Analysis used TAT as the primary outcome measure. Results were extrapolated from the study period (29 days) to a year (240 working days). Sensitivity analyses characterised individual and joint parameter uncertainty and estimated patient cost per test.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>During the study period, XpertHIV was cost-minimising at $42.34 per test compared to $66.66 for PCR. Over a year, XpertHIV remained cost-minimising at $16.12 compared to PCR at $27.06. From the patient perspective (travel, food, lost productivity), the cost per test of XpertHIV was $2.45. XpertHIV had a mean TAT of 7.10 hours compared to 153.15 hours for PCR. Extrapolates accounting for equipment costs, lab consumables and losses to follow up estimated annual savings of $2,193,538.88 if XpertHIV is used nationally, as opposed to PCR.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This preliminary evidence suggests that adopting POCT XpertHIV will save time, allowing HIV-exposed infants to receive prompt care and may improve outcomes. The Malawi government will pay less due to XpertHIV's cost savings and associated benefits.</p>","PeriodicalId":73758,"journal":{"name":"Journal of global health economics and policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10501532/pdf/nihms-1866209.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of global health economics and policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52872/001c.37787","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/8/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Timely diagnosis of HIV in infants and children is an urgent priority. In Malawi, 40,000 infants annually are HIV exposed. However, gold standard polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR) based testing requires centralised laboratories, causing turn-around times (TAT) of 2 to 3 months and significant loss to follow-up. If feasible and acceptable, minimising diagnostic delays through HIV Point-of-care-testing (POCT) may be cost-effective. We assessed whether POCT Cepheid Xpert HIV-1 Qual assay whole blood (XpertHIV) was more cost-effective than PCR.

Methods: From July-August 2018, 700 PCR Abbott tests using dried blood spots (DBS) were performed on 680 participants who enrolled on the feasibility, acceptability and performance of the XpertHIV study. Newly identified HIV-positive We conducted a cost-minimisation and cost-effectiveness analysis of XpertHIV against PCR, as the standard of care. A random sample of 200 caregivers from the 680 participants had semi-structured interviews to explore costs from a societal perspective of XpertHIV at Mulanje District Hospital, Malawi. Analysis used TAT as the primary outcome measure. Results were extrapolated from the study period (29 days) to a year (240 working days). Sensitivity analyses characterised individual and joint parameter uncertainty and estimated patient cost per test.

Results: During the study period, XpertHIV was cost-minimising at $42.34 per test compared to $66.66 for PCR. Over a year, XpertHIV remained cost-minimising at $16.12 compared to PCR at $27.06. From the patient perspective (travel, food, lost productivity), the cost per test of XpertHIV was $2.45. XpertHIV had a mean TAT of 7.10 hours compared to 153.15 hours for PCR. Extrapolates accounting for equipment costs, lab consumables and losses to follow up estimated annual savings of $2,193,538.88 if XpertHIV is used nationally, as opposed to PCR.

Conclusions: This preliminary evidence suggests that adopting POCT XpertHIV will save time, allowing HIV-exposed infants to receive prompt care and may improve outcomes. The Malawi government will pay less due to XpertHIV's cost savings and associated benefits.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
马拉维采用全血方案的 Cepheid Xpert HIV -1 Qual 检测法与雅培系统的 PCR 检测法的成本计算和成本效益比较。
背景:及时诊断婴幼儿是否感染艾滋病毒是当务之急。在马拉维,每年有 40,000 名婴儿感染艾滋病毒。然而,基于聚合酶链式反应(PCR)的金标准检测需要集中的实验室,导致周转时间(TAT)长达 2 到 3 个月,并造成严重的随访损失。如果可行且可接受,通过艾滋病护理点检测(POCT)最大限度地减少诊断延误可能具有成本效益。我们评估了 POCT Cepheid Xpert HIV-1 Qual 检测全血(XpertHIV)是否比 PCR 更具成本效益:2018年7月至8月,对参加XpertHIV可行性、可接受性和性能研究的680名参与者进行了700次使用干血斑(DBS)的PCR Abbott检测。我们将 XpertHIV 与 PCR 作为标准护理方法进行了成本最小化和成本效益分析。我们从 680 名参与者中随机抽取了 200 名护理人员进行了半结构化访谈,从社会角度探讨马拉维 Mulanje 地区医院 XpertHIV 的成本。分析以 TAT 作为主要结果衡量标准。结果从研究期间(29 天)推断为一年(240 个工作日)。敏感性分析描述了单个参数和联合参数的不确定性,并估算了每次检测的患者成本:在研究期间,XpertHIV 的成本最低,每次检测为 42.34 美元,而 PCR 为 66.66 美元。一年下来,XpertHIV 的成本仍为 16.12 美元,而 PCR 为 27.06 美元。从患者角度(交通、饮食、生产力损失)来看,XpertHIV 的每次检测成本为 2.45 美元。XpertHIV 的平均 TAT 为 7.10 小时,而 PCR 为 153.15 小时。根据设备成本、实验室耗材和后续损失等因素推算,如果在全国范围内使用 XpertHIV 而不是 PCR,每年可节省 2193538.88 美元:这些初步证据表明,采用 POCT XpertHIV 可以节省时间,使暴露于艾滋病病毒的婴儿得到及时治疗,并可能改善治疗效果。由于 XpertHIV 可节省成本并带来相关益处,马拉维政府将减少支付费用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The present value of human life losses associated with COVID-19 in South Africa The approach taken by Canada’s province of Nova Scotia to ban the sale of flavoured electronic cigarettes Use of population indices in cancer research: a scoping review Shaping market access for sustainable production of vaccines in Africa Using mobile health to strengthen the communication skills for effective delivery of health information in Nepal: A qualitative study of the perspectives of Female Community Health Volunteers
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1