Designing an optimal HIV programme for South Africa: Does the optimal package change when diminishing returns are considered?
Background South Africa has a large domestically funded HIV programme with highly saturated coverage levels for most prevention and treatment interventions. To further optimise its allocative efficiency, we designed a novel optimisation method and examined whether the optimal package of interventions changes when interaction and non-linear scale-up effects are incorporated into cost-effectiveness analysis. Methods The conventional league table method in cost-effectiveness analysis relies on the assumption of independence between interventions. We added methodology that allowed the simultaneous consideration of a large number of HIV interventions and their potentially diminishing marginal returns to scale. We analysed the incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 16 HIV interventions based on a well-calibrated epidemiological model that accounted for interaction and non-linear scale-up effects, a custom cost model, and an optimisation routine that iteratively added the most cost-effective intervention onto a rolling baseline before evaluating all remaining options. We compared our results with those based on a league table. Results The rank order of interventions did not differ substantially between the two methods- in each, increasing condom availability and male medical circumcision were found to be most cost-effective, followed by anti-retroviral therapy at current guidelines. However, interventions were less cost-effective throughout when evaluated under the optimisation method, indicating substantial diminishing marginal returns, with ICERs being on average 437% higher under our optimisation routine. Conclusions Conventional league tables may exaggerate the cost-effectiveness of interventions when programmes are implemented at scale. Accounting for interaction and non-linear scale-up effects provides more realistic estimates in highly saturated real-world settings..
Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
---|
Erscheinungsjahr: |
2017 |
---|---|
Erschienen: |
2017 |
Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:17 |
---|---|
Enthalten in: |
BMC public health - 17(2017), 1 vom: 31. Jan. |
Sprache: |
Englisch |
---|
Beteiligte Personen: |
Chiu, Calvin [VerfasserIn] |
---|
Links: |
Volltext [kostenfrei] |
---|
Themen: |
Cost-effectiveness analysis |
---|
Anmerkungen: |
© The Author(s). 2017 |
---|
doi: |
10.1186/s12889-017-4023-3 |
---|
funding: |
|
---|---|
Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
PPN (Katalog-ID): |
OLC2100602322 |
---|
LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | OLC2100602322 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20230401231427.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 230401s2017 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1186/s12889-017-4023-3 |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)OLC2100602322 | ||
035 | |a (DE-He213)s12889-017-4023-3-e | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
082 | 0 | 4 | |a 610 |q VZ |
082 | 0 | 4 | |a 610 |q VZ |
100 | 1 | |a Chiu, Calvin |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Designing an optimal HIV programme for South Africa: Does the optimal package change when diminishing returns are considered? |
264 | 1 | |c 2017 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
500 | |a © The Author(s). 2017 | ||
520 | |a Background South Africa has a large domestically funded HIV programme with highly saturated coverage levels for most prevention and treatment interventions. To further optimise its allocative efficiency, we designed a novel optimisation method and examined whether the optimal package of interventions changes when interaction and non-linear scale-up effects are incorporated into cost-effectiveness analysis. Methods The conventional league table method in cost-effectiveness analysis relies on the assumption of independence between interventions. We added methodology that allowed the simultaneous consideration of a large number of HIV interventions and their potentially diminishing marginal returns to scale. We analysed the incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 16 HIV interventions based on a well-calibrated epidemiological model that accounted for interaction and non-linear scale-up effects, a custom cost model, and an optimisation routine that iteratively added the most cost-effective intervention onto a rolling baseline before evaluating all remaining options. We compared our results with those based on a league table. Results The rank order of interventions did not differ substantially between the two methods- in each, increasing condom availability and male medical circumcision were found to be most cost-effective, followed by anti-retroviral therapy at current guidelines. However, interventions were less cost-effective throughout when evaluated under the optimisation method, indicating substantial diminishing marginal returns, with ICERs being on average 437% higher under our optimisation routine. Conclusions Conventional league tables may exaggerate the cost-effectiveness of interventions when programmes are implemented at scale. Accounting for interaction and non-linear scale-up effects provides more realistic estimates in highly saturated real-world settings. | ||
650 | 4 | |a HIV | |
650 | 4 | |a Modelling | |
650 | 4 | |a Optimisation | |
650 | 4 | |a Cost-effectiveness analysis | |
650 | 4 | |a South Africa | |
650 | 4 | |a Health economics | |
700 | 1 | |a Johnson, Leigh F. |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Jamieson, Lise |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Larson, Bruce A. |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Meyer-Rath, Gesine |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t BMC public health |d BioMed Central, 2001 |g 17(2017), 1 vom: 31. Jan. |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)326643583 |w (DE-600)2041338-5 |w (DE-576)107014572 |x 1471-2458 |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:17 |g year:2017 |g number:1 |g day:31 |g month:01 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-017-4023-3 |z kostenfrei |3 Volltext |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a GBV_OLC | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_11 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_170 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_206 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_224 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_702 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2001 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2003 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2005 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2006 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2007 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2008 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2009 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2010 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2011 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2015 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2020 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2021 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2025 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2027 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2031 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2038 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2044 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2048 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2055 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2056 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2057 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2061 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2111 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2113 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2134 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2190 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2446 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4012 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4367 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 17 |j 2017 |e 1 |b 31 |c 01 |