Cost-effectiveness of malaria microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests versus presumptive diagnosis: implications for malaria control in Uganda

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Standard

Cost-effectiveness of malaria microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests versus presumptive diagnosis : implications for malaria control in Uganda. / Batwala, Vincent; Magnussen, Pascal; Hansen, Kristian Schultz; Nuwaha, Fred.

In: Malaria Journal, Vol. 10, No. 372, 2011.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

Harvard

Batwala, V, Magnussen, P, Hansen, KS & Nuwaha, F 2011, 'Cost-effectiveness of malaria microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests versus presumptive diagnosis: implications for malaria control in Uganda', Malaria Journal, vol. 10, no. 372. https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-10-372

APA

Batwala, V., Magnussen, P., Hansen, K. S., & Nuwaha, F. (2011). Cost-effectiveness of malaria microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests versus presumptive diagnosis: implications for malaria control in Uganda. Malaria Journal, 10(372). https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-10-372

Vancouver

Batwala V, Magnussen P, Hansen KS, Nuwaha F. Cost-effectiveness of malaria microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests versus presumptive diagnosis: implications for malaria control in Uganda. Malaria Journal. 2011;10(372). https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-2875-10-372

Author

Batwala, Vincent ; Magnussen, Pascal ; Hansen, Kristian Schultz ; Nuwaha, Fred. / Cost-effectiveness of malaria microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests versus presumptive diagnosis : implications for malaria control in Uganda. In: Malaria Journal. 2011 ; Vol. 10, No. 372.

Bibtex

@article{e30794a466884a769972c3f832e35d27,
title = "Cost-effectiveness of malaria microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests versus presumptive diagnosis: implications for malaria control in Uganda",
abstract = "ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Current Uganda National Malaria treatment guidelines recommend parasitological confirmation either by microscopy or rapid diagnostic test (RDT) before treatment with artemether-lumefantrine (AL). However, the cost-effectiveness of these strategies has not been assessed at rural operational primary care centres. METHODS: Three health centres (HCs) were randomized to three diagnostic arms (microscopy, RDT and presumptive diagnosis) in a district of low and another of high malaria transmission intensities in Uganda. Some 22,052 patients presenting with fever at outpatients departments were enrolled from March 2010 to February 2011. Of these, a random sample of 1,627 was selected to measure additional socio-economic characteristics. Costing was performed following the standard step-down cost allocation and the ingredients approach. Effectiveness was measured as the number and proportion of patients correctly diagnosed and treated. Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) were estimated from the societal perspective (Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00565071). RESULTS: Overall RDT was most cost-effective with lowest ICER US$5.0 compared to microscopy US$9.61 per case correctly diagnosed and treated. In the high transmission setting, ICER was US$4.38 for RDT and US$12.98 for microscopy. The corresponding ICERs in the low transmission setting were US$5.85 and US$7.63 respectively. The difference in ICERs between RDT and microscopy was greater in the high transmission area (US$8.9) than in low transmission setting (US$1.78). At a willingness to pay of US$2.8, RDT remained cost effective up to a threshold value of the cost of treatment of US$4.7. CONCLUSION: RDT was cost effective in both low and high transmission settings. With a global campaign to reduce the costs of AL and RDT, the Malaria Control Programme and stakeholders need a strategy for malaria diagnosis because as the cost of AL decreases, presumptive treatment is likely to become more attractive.",
author = "Vincent Batwala and Pascal Magnussen and Hansen, {Kristian Schultz} and Fred Nuwaha",
year = "2011",
doi = "10.1186/1475-2875-10-372",
language = "English",
volume = "10",
journal = "Malaria Journal",
issn = "1475-2875",
publisher = "BioMed Central",
number = "372",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost-effectiveness of malaria microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests versus presumptive diagnosis

T2 - implications for malaria control in Uganda

AU - Batwala, Vincent

AU - Magnussen, Pascal

AU - Hansen, Kristian Schultz

AU - Nuwaha, Fred

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Current Uganda National Malaria treatment guidelines recommend parasitological confirmation either by microscopy or rapid diagnostic test (RDT) before treatment with artemether-lumefantrine (AL). However, the cost-effectiveness of these strategies has not been assessed at rural operational primary care centres. METHODS: Three health centres (HCs) were randomized to three diagnostic arms (microscopy, RDT and presumptive diagnosis) in a district of low and another of high malaria transmission intensities in Uganda. Some 22,052 patients presenting with fever at outpatients departments were enrolled from March 2010 to February 2011. Of these, a random sample of 1,627 was selected to measure additional socio-economic characteristics. Costing was performed following the standard step-down cost allocation and the ingredients approach. Effectiveness was measured as the number and proportion of patients correctly diagnosed and treated. Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) were estimated from the societal perspective (Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00565071). RESULTS: Overall RDT was most cost-effective with lowest ICER US$5.0 compared to microscopy US$9.61 per case correctly diagnosed and treated. In the high transmission setting, ICER was US$4.38 for RDT and US$12.98 for microscopy. The corresponding ICERs in the low transmission setting were US$5.85 and US$7.63 respectively. The difference in ICERs between RDT and microscopy was greater in the high transmission area (US$8.9) than in low transmission setting (US$1.78). At a willingness to pay of US$2.8, RDT remained cost effective up to a threshold value of the cost of treatment of US$4.7. CONCLUSION: RDT was cost effective in both low and high transmission settings. With a global campaign to reduce the costs of AL and RDT, the Malaria Control Programme and stakeholders need a strategy for malaria diagnosis because as the cost of AL decreases, presumptive treatment is likely to become more attractive.

AB - ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Current Uganda National Malaria treatment guidelines recommend parasitological confirmation either by microscopy or rapid diagnostic test (RDT) before treatment with artemether-lumefantrine (AL). However, the cost-effectiveness of these strategies has not been assessed at rural operational primary care centres. METHODS: Three health centres (HCs) were randomized to three diagnostic arms (microscopy, RDT and presumptive diagnosis) in a district of low and another of high malaria transmission intensities in Uganda. Some 22,052 patients presenting with fever at outpatients departments were enrolled from March 2010 to February 2011. Of these, a random sample of 1,627 was selected to measure additional socio-economic characteristics. Costing was performed following the standard step-down cost allocation and the ingredients approach. Effectiveness was measured as the number and proportion of patients correctly diagnosed and treated. Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) were estimated from the societal perspective (Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00565071). RESULTS: Overall RDT was most cost-effective with lowest ICER US$5.0 compared to microscopy US$9.61 per case correctly diagnosed and treated. In the high transmission setting, ICER was US$4.38 for RDT and US$12.98 for microscopy. The corresponding ICERs in the low transmission setting were US$5.85 and US$7.63 respectively. The difference in ICERs between RDT and microscopy was greater in the high transmission area (US$8.9) than in low transmission setting (US$1.78). At a willingness to pay of US$2.8, RDT remained cost effective up to a threshold value of the cost of treatment of US$4.7. CONCLUSION: RDT was cost effective in both low and high transmission settings. With a global campaign to reduce the costs of AL and RDT, the Malaria Control Programme and stakeholders need a strategy for malaria diagnosis because as the cost of AL decreases, presumptive treatment is likely to become more attractive.

U2 - 10.1186/1475-2875-10-372

DO - 10.1186/1475-2875-10-372

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 22182735

VL - 10

JO - Malaria Journal

JF - Malaria Journal

SN - 1475-2875

IS - 372

ER -

ID: 36029192