Background: Tunafasi is a community-based rehabilitation (CBR) programme for persons with disability, implemented by a local non-governmental organisation in Uvira, Democratic Republic of Congo, in partnership with government. To assess affordability and support discussions with the government about continued financing and implementation, Tunafasi representatives commissioned a cost-effectiveness study of the programme's health component.
Objectives: This study aimed to estimate the programme's impacts, costs, cost per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted and affordability of the health component implemented from February 2019 to December 2021.
Refugees and other displaced persons are exposed to many risk factors for unhealthy alcohol and other drug (AOD) use and concomitant mental health problems. Evidence-based services for AOD use and mental health comorbidities are rarely available in humanitarian settings. In high income countries, screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment (SBIRT) systems can provide appropriate care for AOD use but have rarely been used in low- and middle-income countries and to our knowledge never tested in a humanitarian setting.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFIntroduction: In 2017, aligned with global World Health Organization tetanus guidelines, Vietnam prepared evidence to support a recommendation to introduce the tetanus-diphtheria (Td) vaccine into routine immunization. This study aimed to provide evidence on the costs and budgetary impact of the potential replacement of the tetanus-toxoid (TT) vaccine with the Td vaccine, considering different possible delivery strategies.
Method: We used an activity-based ingredients costing approach to estimate the 2017 program costs of providing TT vaccination to girls aged 15-16 years and conducting Td campaigns in outbreak areas.
In many low- and middle-income countries, planning cycles and policy decisions are not always informed by cost evidence, even where relevant and recent cost evidence is available. The Immunization Costing Action Network (ICAN) project was a research and learning community designed to strengthen country capacity to generate immunization cost evidence and to understand and improve the evidence-to-policy linkages for the evidence. We identified key factors that increase the likelihood that health policy makers will use evidence for policy making or planning, which shaped the development of a 6-step evidence to policy and practice (EPP) facilitated process.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFIntroduction: Information on the costs of routine immunization programs is needed for budgeting, planning, and domestic resource mobilization. This information is particularly important for countries such as Tanzania that are preparing to transition out of support from Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. This study aimed to estimate the total and unit costs for of child immunization in Tanzania from July 2016 to June 2017 and make this evidence available to key stakeholders.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFHigh-quality evidence on the cost of delivering vaccines is essential for policymakers, planners, and donors to ensure sufficient, equitable, predictable, and sustainable financing. However, poor practices and reporting oversights in both the published and grey literature limit the understanding and usability of cost data. This paper describes quality assessment results and quantifies problems with immunization costing study reporting practices found in 68 articles and reports included in an immunization delivery unit cost repository focused on low- and middle-income countries and launched in 2018, the Immunization Delivery Cost Catalogue (IDCC).
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBackground: To plan for the financial sustainability of immunization programs and make informed decisions to improve immunization coverage and equity, decision-makers need to know how much these programs cost beyond the cost of the vaccine. Non-vaccine delivery cost estimates can significantly influence the cost-effectiveness estimates used to allocate resources at the country level. However, many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) do not have immunization delivery unit cost estimates available, or have estimates that are uncertain, unreliable, or old.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFIntroduction: Information on immunization delivery costs (IDCs) is essential for better planning and budgeting for the sustainability and performance of national programs. However, delivery cost evidence is fragmented and of variable quality, making it difficult for policymakers, planners, and other stakeholders to understand and use. This study aimed to consolidate and summarize the evidence on delivery costs, answering the question: What are the unit costs of vaccine delivery across low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and through a variety of delivery strategies?
Methods: We conducted a systematic review of over 15,000 published and unpublished resources from 2005 to 2018 that included IDCs in LMICs.
Objectives: Cost-effectiveness analyses are increasingly used to aid decisions about resource allocation in healthcare; this practice is slow to translate into critical care. We sought to identify and summarize original cost-effectiveness studies presenting cost per quality-adjusted life year, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, or cost per life-year ratios for treatments used in ICUs.
Design: We conducted a systematic search of the English-language literature for cost-effectiveness analyses published from 1993 to 2018 in critical care.
Background: A key aspect of monitoring and evaluating health programs is ensuring that benefits are reaching their target population. We conducted a benefit incidence analysis (BIA) of a Shell-sponsored community health insurance scheme in Nigeria to determine the extent to which the target group (the poor) was benefitting.
Methods: We examined a sample of 616 patients' hospital attendance, financial and administrative records from 2012-2013.
Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of community-based practitioner programmes in Ethiopia, Indonesia and Kenya.
Methods: Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for the three programmes were estimated from a government perspective. Cost data were collected for 2012.
Objective: This study sought to synthesize and critically review evidence on costs and cost-effectiveness of community health worker (CHW) programmes in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to inform policy dialogue around their role in health systems.
Methods: From a larger systematic review on effectiveness and factors influencing performance of close-to-community providers, complemented by a supplementary search in PubMed, we did an exploratory review of a subset of papers (32 published primary studies and 4 reviews from the period January 2003-July 2015) about the costs and cost-effectiveness of CHWs. Studies were assessed using a data extraction matrix including methodological approach and findings.
Background: Performance-based financing is increasingly being applied in a variety of contexts, with the expectation that it can improve the performance of health systems. However, while there is a growing literature on implementation issues and effects on outputs, there has been relatively little focus on interactions between PBF and health systems and how these should be studied. This paper aims to contribute to filling that gap by developing a framework for assessing the interactions between PBF and health systems, focusing on low and middle income countries.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBackground: As part of a comprehensive study on the primary health care system in Iraq, we sought to explore primary care providers' perspectives about the main problems influencing the provision of primary care services and opportunities to improve the system.
Methods: A qualitative study based on four focus groups involving 40 primary care providers from 12 primary health care centres was conducted in Erbil governorate in the Iraqi Kurdistan region between July and October 2010. A topic guide was used to lead discussions and covered questions on positive aspects of and current problems with the primary care system in addition to the priority needs for its improvement.