Goodman C A, Coleman P G, Mills A J
Department of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, UK.
Lancet. 1999 Jul 31;354(9176):378-85. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(99)02141-8.
Information on the cost-effectiveness of malaria control is needed for the WHO Roll Back Malaria campaign, but is sparse. We used mathematical models to calculate cost-effectiveness ratios for the main prevention and treatment interventions in sub-Saharan Africa.
We analysed interventions to prevent malaria in childhood (insecticide-treated nets, residual spraying of houses, and chemoprophylaxis) and pregnancy (chloroquine chemoprophylaxis and sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine intermittent treatment), and to improve malaria treatment (improved compliance, improved availability of second-line and third-line drugs, and changes in first-line drug). We developed models that included probabilistic sensitivity analysis to calculate ranges for the cost per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted for each intervention in three economic strata. Data were obtained from published and unpublished sources, and consultations with researchers and programme managers.
In a very-low-income country, for insecticide treatment of existing nets, the cost-effectiveness range was US$4-10 per DALY averted; for provision of nets and insecticide treatment $19-85; for residual spraying (two rounds per year) $32-58; for chemoprophylaxis for children $3-12 (assuming an existing delivery system); for intermittent treatment of pregnant women $4-29; and for improvement in case management $1-8. Although some interventions are inexpensive, achieving high coverage with an intervention to prevent childhood malaria would use a high proportion of current health-care expenditure.
Cost-effective interventions are available. A package of interventions to decrease the bulk of the malaria burden is not, however, affordable in very-low-income countries. Coverage of the most vulnerable groups in Africa will require substantial assistance from external donors.
世卫组织的遏制疟疾运动需要有关疟疾控制成本效益的信息,但此类信息却很匮乏。我们运用数学模型来计算撒哈拉以南非洲主要预防和治疗干预措施的成本效益比。
我们分析了预防儿童期疟疾的干预措施(经杀虫剂处理的蚊帐、房屋残留喷洒以及化学预防)和孕期疟疾预防措施(氯喹化学预防和磺胺多辛-乙胺嘧啶间歇治疗),以及改善疟疾治疗的措施(提高依从性、增加二线和三线药物的可及性以及一线药物的更换)。我们开发了包含概率敏感性分析的模型,以计算三种经济阶层中每项干预措施避免每例伤残调整生命年(DALY)的成本范围。数据来自已发表和未发表的资料,以及与研究人员和项目管理人员的磋商。
在一个极低收入国家,对于现有蚊帐进行杀虫剂处理,避免每例DALY的成本效益范围为4 - 10美元;提供蚊帐并进行杀虫剂处理为19 - 85美元;残留喷洒(每年两轮)为32 - 58美元;儿童化学预防为3 - 12美元(假设现有递送系统);孕妇间歇治疗为4 - 29美元;以及改善病例管理为1 - 8美元。尽管一些干预措施成本低廉,但要通过一项预防儿童期疟疾的干预措施实现高覆盖率,将占用当前医疗保健支出的很大一部分。
存在具有成本效益的干预措施。然而,在极低收入国家,一套旨在减轻大部分疟疾负担的干预措施无力承担。非洲最脆弱群体的覆盖需要外部捐助者提供大量援助。