Ogbuoji Osondu, Shahid Minahil, Zimmerman Armand, Liu Jenny X, Kayentao Kassoum, Whidden Caroline, Treleaven Emily, Traoré Coumba, Sogoba Mahamadou, Doumbia Saibou, Boettiger David Charles, Cissé Amadou Beydi, Keita Youssouf, Berthé Mohamed, Johnson Ari
Duke Center for Policy Impact in Global Health, Duke Global Health Institute, Durham, North Carolina, USA
Department of Population Health Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
BMJ Glob Health. 2024 Dec 27;9(12):e014940. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2023-014940.
Despite recommendations from the WHO, antenatal care (ANC) coverage remains low in many low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). Community health workers (CHWs) can play an important role in expanding ANC coverage through pregnancy identification, provision of health education, screening for complications, delivery of therapeutic care and referral to higher levels of care. However, despite the success of CHW programmes in various countries, WHO has called for additional research to develop evidence-based models that optimise CHW service delivery and that can be replicated across geographies.
The ProCCM Trial was a cluster-randomised controlled trial to compare proactive home visits by CHWs (intervention, 69 village clusters) to the provision of CHW care at community fixed sites only (control, 68 village clusters) in the Bankass health district in Central Mali. In this study, we conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of proactive CHW home visits in improving ANC utilisation, a secondary outcome of the ProCCM trial. We analysed five ANC outcomes: (1) number of ANC contacts, (2) at least one ANC contact, (3) at least four ANC contacts, (4) at least eight ANC contacts and (5) ANC initiated in the first trimester. We assumed two perspectives, a CHW programme's and the Full ANC programme's perspective, which included facility-based as well as community-based ANC. We estimated programme costs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and probabilities of the intervention being more cost-effective than the control at different willingness-to-pay (WTP) thresholds.
Proactive home visits were cost-saving from the CHW programme's perspective (ICERs: -$21.39 to -$79.20 per ANC utilisation outcome) and from the Full ANC programme perspective (ICERs: -$1.70 to -$6.30 per ANC utilisation outcome) compared with the fixed-site CHW care. The likelihood of the intervention being more cost-effective than the control was 100% at WTP thresholds $0 per ANC utilisation outcome and between $12.5 and $50.00 per ANC utilisation outcome in the CHW- and Full ANC programme perspectives, respectively.
Our results provide evidence that proactive home visits produce more value per dollar spent as a means of improving the uptake of ANC services compared with fixed-site CHW services.
NCT02694055.
尽管世界卫生组织(WHO)给出了相关建议,但在许多低收入和中等收入国家(LMICs),产前保健(ANC)的覆盖率仍然很低。社区卫生工作者(CHWs)可以在扩大ANC覆盖率方面发挥重要作用,包括识别怀孕情况、提供健康教育、筛查并发症、提供治疗护理以及转诊到更高水平的医疗机构。然而,尽管CHW项目在各个国家取得了成功,但WHO仍呼吁进行更多研究,以开发基于证据的模式,优化CHW服务提供,并能在不同地区复制。
ProCCM试验是一项整群随机对照试验,在马里中部的班卡斯卫生区,比较CHWs进行的主动家访(干预组,69个村庄群)与仅在社区固定地点提供CHW护理(对照组,68个村庄群)。在本研究中,我们对主动CHW家访在改善ANC利用率方面进行了成本效益分析,这是ProCCM试验的一个次要结果。我们分析了五项ANC结果:(1)ANC接触次数;(2)至少有一次ANC接触;(3)至少有四次ANC接触;(4)至少有八次ANC接触;(5)在孕早期开始接受ANC。我们假定了两个视角,即CHW项目视角和全面ANC项目视角,全面ANC项目包括基于医疗机构的以及基于社区的ANC。我们估计了项目成本、增量成本效益比(ICERs)以及在不同支付意愿(WTP)阈值下干预措施比对照组更具成本效益的概率。
从CHW项目视角(ICERs:每个ANC利用率结果为 -21.39美元至 -79.20美元)和全面ANC项目视角(ICERs:每个ANC利用率结果为 -1.70美元至 -6.30美元)来看,与固定地点的CHW护理相比,主动家访节省了成本。在CHW项目视角和全面ANC项目视角下,分别在每个ANC利用率结果的WTP阈值为0美元以及每个ANC利用率结果为12.5美元至50.00美元时,干预措施比对照组更具成本效益的可能性为100%。
我们的结果提供了证据,表明与固定地点的CHW服务相比,主动家访作为一种改善ANC服务利用率的方式,每花费一美元能产生更多价值。
NCT(02694055)