Malhotra Akash, Bedru Ahmed, Mulatu Fiseha, Nonyane Bareng A S, Cohn Silvia, Mulder Christiaan, Bayu Samuel, Borsboom Stephanie, Conradie Gidea, Golub Jonathan E, Chaisson Richard E, Churchyard Gavin, Dowdy David W, Sohn Hojoon, Salazar-Austin Nicole
Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, United States of America.
Department of Global Health, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
PLOS Glob Public Health. 2025 Apr 30;5(4):e0004466. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0004466. eCollection 2025.
Tuberculosis preventive treatment (TPT) is an essential intervention recommended for all child contacts in Ethiopia under 15 years who are at risk of tuberculosis (TB) infection. We conducted a cost and cost-effectiveness analysis of home-based versus facility-based TPT provision for child contacts in Ethiopia. As part of the CHIP TB trial, a pragmatic, cluster-randomized trial conducted at eighteen clinics in Ethiopia, clinics were randomized to either a home-based model (intervention arm), administered by community health workers, or a facility-based model (standard of care) for managing child contacts. Cost data were collected from both a health service perspective and a household perspective, capturing all costs relevant to TPT. Costs were evaluated on a per-household basis, with the primary outcome being the difference in median costs per household initiating TPT. A secondary outcome assessed the cost-effectiveness as the incremental cost per additional child contact starting TPT. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were conducted to examine the robustness of findings. At an average cost of US$18.92 per household managed, Home-based contact management, including TPT delivery was cost-saving compared to facility-based TPT delivery (US$27.24 per household managed) assessed based on the partial-societal perspectives, largely due to reductions in household out-of-pocket costs. The home-based strategy was both less costly and had increased TPT initiation in 61.5% of the scenarios assessed in the PSA. Home-based contact management is a cost-saving alternative for households and provides comparable initiation rates to facility-based care, making it a feasible approach to improve TB preventive treatment accessibility. Although it does not entirely replace facility-based care, a hybrid model that respects household preferences and allows flexibility in delivery could enhance TB care access for socio-economically disadvantaged households, potentially reducing health inequities. The trial was registered on clinicaltrials.gov NCT04369326 on April 30, 2020. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04369326.
结核病预防性治疗(TPT)是埃塞俄比亚一项针对所有15岁以下有结核病(TB)感染风险的儿童接触者推荐的重要干预措施。我们对埃塞俄比亚儿童接触者在家中接受TPT与在医疗机构接受TPT的成本及成本效益进行了分析。作为CHIP TB试验的一部分,该试验是在埃塞俄比亚的18家诊所进行的一项务实的整群随机试验,诊所被随机分配到由社区卫生工作者实施的居家模式(干预组)或管理儿童接触者的医疗机构模式(护理标准)。从卫生服务和家庭两个角度收集成本数据,涵盖与TPT相关的所有成本。按每户进行成本评估,主要结果是启动TPT的每户中位数成本差异。次要结果将成本效益评估为每增加一名开始接受TPT的儿童接触者的增量成本。进行了概率敏感性分析(PSA)以检验研究结果的稳健性。从部分社会视角评估,居家接触管理(包括提供TPT)每户平均成本为18.92美元,与医疗机构提供TPT(每户管理成本为27.24美元)相比节省了成本,这主要是由于家庭自付费用的减少。在PSA评估中的61.5%的情景下,居家策略成本更低且TPT启动率有所提高。居家接触管理对家庭来说是一种节省成本的替代方案,并且与医疗机构护理的启动率相当,使其成为改善结核病预防性治疗可及性的可行方法。尽管它不能完全取代医疗机构护理,但一种尊重家庭偏好并在提供服务方面具有灵活性的混合模式可以提高社会经济弱势家庭获得结核病护理的机会,有可能减少健康不平等。该试验于2020年4月30日在clinicaltrials.gov上注册,注册号为NCT04369326。https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04369326 。