Article

The global impact of scaling up HIV/AIDS prevention programs in low- and middle-income countries.

Futures Group/Constella, Glastonbury, CT 06033, USA.
Science (Impact Factor: 31.2). 04/2006; 311(5766):1474-6. DOI:10.1126/science.1121176
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT A strong, global commitment to expanded prevention programs targeted at sexual transmission and transmission among injecting drug users, started now, could avert 28 million new HIV infections between 2005 and 2015. This figure is more than half of the new infections that might otherwise occur during that period in 125 low- and middle-income countries. Although preventing these new infections would require investing about U.S.$122 billion over this period, it would reduce future needs for treatment and care. Our analysis suggests that it will cost about U.S.$3900 to prevent each new infection, but that this will produce a savings of U.S.$4700 in forgone treatment and care costs. Thus, greater spending on prevention now would not only prevent more than half the new infections that would occur from 2005 to 2015 but would actually produce a net financial saving as future costs for treatment and care are averted.

0 0
 · 
0 Bookmarks
 · 
84 Views
  • Source
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Epidemiological data from Zimbabwe suggests that genital infection with Schistosoma haematobium may increase the risk of HIV infection in young women. Therefore, the treatment of Schistosoma haematobium with praziquantel could be a potential strategy for reducing HIV infection. Here we assess the potential cost-effectiveness of praziquantel as a novel intervention strategy against HIV infection. We developed a mathematical model of female genital schistosomiasis (FGS) and HIV infections in Zimbabwe that we fitted to cross-sectional data of FGS and HIV prevalence of 1999. We validated our epidemic projections using antenatal clinic data on HIV prevalence. We simulated annual praziquantel administration to school-age children. We then used these model predictions to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of annual administration of praziquantel as a potential measure to reduce the burden of HIV in sub-Saharan Africa. We showed that for a variation of efficacy between 30-70% of mass praziquantel administration for reducing the enhanced risk of HIV transmission per sexual act due to FGS, annual administration of praziquantel to school-age children in Zimbabwe could result in net savings of US$16-101 million compared with no mass treatment of schistosomiasis over a ten-year period. For a variation in efficacy between 30-70% of mass praziquantel administration for reducing the acquisition of FGS, annual administration of praziquantel to school-age children could result in net savings of US$36-92 million over a ten-year period. In addition to reducing schistosomiasis burden, mass praziquantel administration may be a highly cost-effective way of reducing HIV infections in sub-Saharan Africa. Program costs per case of HIV averted are similar to, and under some conditions much better than, other interventions that are currently implemented in Africa to reduce HIV transmission. As a cost-saving strategy, mass praziquantel administration should be prioritized over other less cost-effective public health interventions.
    PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases 08/2013; 7(8):e2346. · 4.57 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: It is increasingly important to prioritize the most cost-effective HIV interventions. We sought to summarize the evidence on which types of interventions provide the best value for money in regions with concentrated HIV epidemics.Methods: We conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature reporting measurements of cost-effectiveness or cost-benefit for HIV/AIDS interventions in Asia and Eastern Europe. We also collated HIV/AIDS spending assessment data from case-study countries in the region.Results: We identified 91 studies for inclusion, 47 of which were from peer-reviewed journals. Generally, in concentrated settings, prevention of mother-to-child transmission programmes and prevention programmes targeting people who inject drugs and sex workers had lower incremental cost-effectiveness ratios than programmes aimed at the general population. The few studies evaluating programmes targeting men who have sex with men indicate moderate cost-effectiveness. Collation of prevention programme spending data from 12 countries in the region (none of which had generalized epidemics) indicated that resources for the general population/non-targeted was greater than 30% for eight countries and greater than 50% for five countries.Conclusions: There is a misalignment between national spending on HIV/AIDS responses and the most affected populations across the region. In concentrated epidemics, scarce funding should be directed more towards most-at-risk populations. Reaching consensus on general principles of cost-effectiveness of programmes by epidemic settings is difficult due to inconsistent evaluation approaches. Adopting a standard costing, impact evaluation, benefits calculation, analysis and reporting framework would enable cross comparisons and improve HIV resource prioritization and allocation.
    Journal of the International AIDS Society 01/2014; 17(1):18822. · 3.94 Impact Factor
  • Source

Full-text (2 Sources)

View
23 Downloads
Available from
Oct 29, 2012