World Health Organization (WHO), Geneva, Switzerland.
CERDI-CNRS-IRD-UCA, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2021 Nov 1;10(11):678-696. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2020.251.
This paper forms part of an update of the World Health Organization Choosing Interventions that are Cost-Effective (WHO-CHOICE) programmes. It provides an assessment of global health system performance during the first decade of the 21st century (2000-2010) with respect to allocative efficiency in HIV, tuberculosis (TB) and malaria control, thereby shining a spotlight on programme development and scale up in these Millennium Development Goal (MDG) priority areas; and examining the cost-effectiveness of selected best-practice interventions and intervention packages commonly in use during that period.
Generalized cost-effectiveness analysis (GCEA) was used to determine the cost-effectiveness of the selected interventions. Impact modelling was performed using the OpenMalaria platform for malaria and using the Goals and TIME (TB Impact Model and Estimates) models in Spectrum for HIV and TB. All health system costs, regardless of payer, were included and reported in international dollars. Health outcomes are estimated and reported as the gain in healthy life years (HLYs) due to the specific intervention or combination. Analysis was restricted to eastern sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia.
At the reference year of 2010, commonly used interventions for HIV, TB and malaria were cost-effective, with cost-effectiveness ratios less than I$ 100/HLY saved for virtually all interventions included. HIV, TB and malaria prevention and treatment interventions are highly cost-effective and can be implemented through a phased approach to full coverage to achieve maximum health benefits and contribute to the progressive elimination of these diseases.
During the first decade of the 21st century (2000-2010), the global community has done well overall for HIV, TB, and malaria programmes as regards both economic efficiency and programmatic selection criteria. The role of international assistance, financial and technical, arguably was critical to these successes. As the global community now tackles the challenge of universal health coverage, this analysis can reinforce commitment to Sustainable Development Goal targets but also the importance of continued focus on these critical programme areas.
本文是世界卫生组织成本效益选择干预措施(WHO-CHOICE)方案更新的一部分。它评估了 21 世纪第一个十年(2000-2010 年)全球卫生系统在艾滋病毒、结核病(TB)和疟疾控制方面的配置效率,从而重点关注这些千年发展目标(MDG)优先领域的方案制定和扩大;并审查了在此期间常用的选定最佳实践干预措施和干预包的成本效益。
广义成本效益分析(GCEA)用于确定选定干预措施的成本效益。使用 OpenMalaria 平台对疟疾进行影响建模,并在 Spectrum 中使用 Goals and TIME(TB Impact Model and Estimates)模型对艾滋病毒和结核病进行建模。包括所有卫生系统成本,无论支付方如何,均以国际元报告。健康结果以特定干预措施或组合带来的健康生命年(HLY)增加来估计和报告。分析仅限于撒哈拉以南非洲东部和东南亚。
在 2010 年的参考年,艾滋病毒、结核病和疟疾的常用干预措施具有成本效益,几乎所有纳入的干预措施的成本效益比均低于每挽救一个 HLY 100 美元。艾滋病毒、结核病和疟疾的预防和治疗干预措施具有很高的成本效益,可以通过分阶段实现全面覆盖的方法来实施,以实现最大的健康效益,并有助于逐步消除这些疾病。
在 21 世纪的第一个十年(2000-2010 年),全球社会在艾滋病毒、结核病和疟疾方案方面总体上在经济效率和方案选择标准方面表现良好。国际援助、财政和技术的作用对这些成功至关重要。随着全球社会现在应对全民健康覆盖的挑战,这一分析可以加强对可持续发展目标目标的承诺,但也强调了继续关注这些关键方案领域的重要性。