Decker Emily C, Adams Molly W, Oswald William E, Flueckiger Rebecca M, Ngondi Jeremiah M, Fall Mawo, Yilmaz Ezgi E, Brooks Lisa C, Kabona George, Sitoe Henis Mior, Kasubi Mabula, Momade Tamimo, Lietman Thomas M, Doan Thuy, Stelmach Rachel D
Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.
RTI International, International Development Group, Washington, Columbia, United States of America.
PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2025 Jul 21;19(7):e0013257. doi: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0013257. eCollection 2025 Jul.
Accurate methods to measure trachoma prevalence are critical to monitor progress and guide mass drug administration as countries near elimination. Currently, countries conduct trachoma prevalence surveys via clinical examination using the simplified trachoma grading system. Grading can have reduced accuracy in low prevalence settings, potentially resulting in errors. Adding ocular swabbing and Chlamydia trachomatis (Ct) infection testing and dried blood spot (DBS) collection and testing can be more sensitive and specific methods for trachoma identification, with potential cost-saving and information benefits. While previous studies have examined the costs of trachoma prevalence surveys, we present the first costing and cost-effectiveness analysis of enhanced trachoma prevalence surveys with ocular swabs and DBS in addition to grading.
METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We calculated the incremental financial cost of enhanced trachoma prevalence surveys with swabs, DBS, and grading using expenditure records from four districts in Tanzania and four districts in Mozambique in 2022. In Tanzania, the cost per cluster of an enhanced survey was $2,337.39 compared to $459.75 for a standard survey. In Mozambique, the cost per cluster of an enhanced survey was $2,147.12, compared to $1,381.46 for a standard survey. We calculated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for each method, defined as the ratio of incremental cost to additional instances of trachoma indicators identified, and explored variation in cost-effectiveness via sensitivity analyses. Adding swabs, DBS, or both was cost-increasing and more effective at identification of trachoma indicators than grading alone. In Tanzania, swabs were the most cost-effective method, while DBS was more cost-effective in Mozambique. Swabs and DBS were less cost-effective when combined than individually. The main factor determining cost-effectiveness was sensitivity.
CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Adding swabs or DBS to trachoma prevalence surveys can be viable, cost-effective methods for identifying trachoma indicators. The additional costs are commensurate with additional information that would support elimination efforts.
随着各国接近消除沙眼,准确测量沙眼患病率的方法对于监测进展和指导大规模药物给药至关重要。目前,各国通过使用简化沙眼分级系统的临床检查来开展沙眼患病率调查。在低患病率环境中,分级的准确性可能会降低,从而可能导致错误。增加眼部拭子采集和沙眼衣原体(Ct)感染检测以及干血斑(DBS)采集和检测可能是更敏感、更具特异性的沙眼识别方法,具有潜在的成本节约和信息效益。虽然之前的研究已经考察了沙眼患病率调查的成本,但我们首次对除分级外还采用眼部拭子和DBS的强化沙眼患病率调查进行了成本核算和成本效益分析。
方法/主要发现:我们利用2022年坦桑尼亚四个地区和莫桑比克四个地区的支出记录,计算了采用拭子、DBS和分级的强化沙眼患病率调查的增量财务成本。在坦桑尼亚,强化调查每个群组的成本为2337.39美元,而标准调查为459.75美元。在莫桑比克,强化调查每个群组的成本为2147.12美元,而标准调查为1381.46美元。我们计算了每种方法的增量成本效益比,即增量成本与额外识别出的沙眼指标实例数量的比率,并通过敏感性分析探讨了成本效益的变化。添加拭子、DBS或两者都添加会增加成本,但在识别沙眼指标方面比单独分级更有效。在坦桑尼亚,拭子是最具成本效益的方法,而在莫桑比克,DBS更具成本效益。拭子和DBS联合使用时的成本效益低于单独使用。决定成本效益的主要因素是敏感性。
结论/意义:在沙眼患病率调查中添加拭子或DBS可能是识别沙眼指标的可行且具有成本效益的方法。额外成本与支持消除工作的额外信息相称。