Informing decision-making for universal access to quality tuberculosis diagnosis in India: an economic-epidemiological model

被引:21
作者
Sohn, Hojoon [1 ]
Kasaie, Parastu [1 ]
Kendall, Emily [2 ]
Gomez, Gabriela B. [3 ]
Vassall, Anna [3 ]
Pai, Madhukar [4 ,5 ,6 ]
Dowdy, David [1 ]
机构
[1] Johns Hopkins Bloomberg Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Epidemiol, 615 N Wolfe St,E6529, Baltimore, MD 21205 USA
[2] Johns Hopkins Univ, Sch Med, Div Infect Dis, Baltimore, MD 21205 USA
[3] London Sch Hyg & Trop Med, Dept Global Hlth & Dev, London WC1E 7HT, England
[4] McGill Univ, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, Montreal, PQ H3A 1A2, Canada
[5] McGill Univ, McGill Int TB Ctr, Montreal, PQ H3A 1A2, Canada
[6] Manipal Acad Higher Educ, Manipal McGill Ctr Infect Dis, Manipal, Karnataka, India
关键词
Tuberculosis; Diagnostic techniques and procedures; Cost-benefit analysis; Systems analysis; COST-EFFECTIVENESS; SERVICES; MTB/RIF;
D O I
10.1186/s12916-019-1384-8
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background India and many other high-burden countries have committed to providing universal access to high-quality diagnosis and drug susceptibility testing (DST) for tuberculosis (TB), but the most cost-effective approach to achieve this goal remains uncertain. Centralized testing at district-level hub facilities with a supporting sample transport network can generate economies of scale, but decentralization to the peripheral level may provide faster diagnosis and reduce losses to follow-up (LTFU). Methods We generated functions to evaluate the costs of centralized and decentralized molecular testing for tuberculosis with Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert), a WHO-endorsed test which can be performed at centralized and decentralized levels. We merged the cost estimates with an agent-based simulation of TB transmission in a hypothetical representative region in India to assess the impact and cost-effectiveness of each strategy. Results Compared against centralized Xpert testing, decentralization was most favorable when testing volume at decentralized facilities and pre-treatment LTFU were high, and specimen transport network was exclusively established for TB. Assuming equal quality of centralized and decentralized testing, decentralization was cost-saving, saving a median $338,000 (interquartile simulation range [IQR] - $222,000; $889,000) per 20 million people over 10 years, in the most cost-favorable scenario. In the most cost-unfavorable scenario, decentralized testing would cost a median $3161 [IQR $2412; $4731] per disability-adjusted life year averted relative to centralized testing. Conclusions Decentralization of Xpert testing is likely to be cost-saving or cost-effective in most settings to which these simulation results might generalize. More decentralized testing is more cost-effective in settings with moderate-to-high peripheral testing volumes, high existing clinical LTFU, inability to share specimen transport costs with other disease entities, and ability to ensure high-quality peripheral Xpert testing. Decision-makers should assess these factors when deciding whether to decentralize molecular testing for tuberculosis.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 31 条
[31]   County-Level Cost-Effectiveness Thresholds: Initial Estimates and the Need for Further Research [J].
Woods, Beth ;
Revill, Paul ;
Sculpher, Mark ;
Claxton, Karl .
VALUE IN HEALTH, 2016, 19 (08) :929-935