Arroz Jorge A H, Candrinho Baltazar, Mendis Chandana, Lopez Melanie, Martins Maria do Rosário O
World Vision International, Maputo, Mozambique.
National Malaria Control Programme, Maputo, Mozambique.
BMC Res Notes. 2019 Sep 14;12(1):578. doi: 10.1186/s13104-019-4620-6.
The aim is to compare the cost-effectiveness of two long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) delivery models (standard vs. new) in universal coverage (UC) campaigns in rural Mozambique.
The total financial cost of delivering LLINs was US$ 231,237.30 and US$ 174,790.14 in the intervention (302,648 LLINs were delivered) and control districts (219,613 LLINs were delivered), respectively. The average cost-effectiveness ratio (ACER) per LLIN delivered and ACER per household (HH) achieving UC was lower in the intervention districts. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per LLIN and ICER per HH reaching UC were US$ 0.68 and US$ 2.24, respectively. Both incremental net benefit (for delivered LLIN and for HHs reaching UC) were positive (intervention deemed cost-effective). Overall, the newer delivery model was the more cost-effective intervention. However, the long-term sustainability of either delivery models is far from guaranteed in Mozambique's current economic context.
比较在莫桑比克农村地区全民覆盖运动中两种长效驱虫蚊帐（LLINs）分发模式（标准模式与新模式）的成本效益。
在干预地区（分发了302,648顶长效驱虫蚊帐）和对照地区（分发了219,613顶长效驱虫蚊帐），分发长效驱虫蚊帐的总财务成本分别为231,237.30美元和174,790.14美元。干预地区每分发一顶长效驱虫蚊帐的平均成本效益比（ACER）以及每户实现全民覆盖的ACER较低。每顶长效驱虫蚊帐的增量成本效益比（ICER）和每户实现全民覆盖的ICER分别为0.68美元和2.24美元。两种增量净效益（针对分发的长效驱虫蚊帐和实现全民覆盖的家庭）均为正值（干预措施被认为具有成本效益）。总体而言，较新的分发模式是更具成本效益的干预措施。然而，在莫桑比克当前的经济背景下，两种分发模式的长期可持续性都远未得到保证。
