Sexually transmitted diseases · 2022
Costs Associated With Incorporation of Network Approaches Into Sexually Transmitted Disease Program Activities.
СтатьяПоддержка службы здравоохранения СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Williams Austin M, Eppink Samuel T, Guy Jalila N, Seña Arlene C, Berruti Andrés A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Network approaches can be used to study sociosexual partnerships and identify individuals at high risk of infection. Little is known about the cost structure of these services and their association with STD diagnoses.
METHOD: We collected costs associated with using a peer network strategy to recruit men who have sex with men and transwomen of color in 4 counties in North Carolina: Guilford, Forsyth, Durham, and Wake from February through October 2019. We used a comprehensive costing approach to gather detailed retrospective information on the intervention cost, broken down by category and programmatic activity.
RESULTS: The sociosexual networks collected consisted of 31 initial seeds (index cases) and 49 peers of those seeds. In peers, 5 cases of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and 10 cases of syphilis were identified. The cost per case (HIV or syphilis) identified was $7325. Personnel costs accounted for 80% of total expenditures, followed by laboratory expenses (12%). Personnel cost was distributed between disease intervention specialist patient navigators (51%), nonclinical (37%), and management (12%) staff. General administration was the costliest programmatic activity (37%), followed by case management and field services (37%), and study activities (11%). The estimated average cost per patient tested was $2242.
CONCLUSIONS: Finding positive peer cases in nonclinical settings is costly but may be crucial for limiting the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. The cost of staff was the major driver. This study demonstrates that using a network strategy can be a cost-effective way to identify, test, and refer patients at high risk of syphilis and HIV infections to care.
METHOD: We collected costs associated with using a peer network strategy to recruit men who have sex with men and transwomen of color in 4 counties in North Carolina: Guilford, Forsyth, Durham, and Wake from February through October 2019. We used a comprehensive costing approach to gather detailed retrospective information on the intervention cost, broken down by category and programmatic activity.
RESULTS: The sociosexual networks collected consisted of 31 initial seeds (index cases) and 49 peers of those seeds. In peers, 5 cases of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and 10 cases of syphilis were identified. The cost per case (HIV or syphilis) identified was $7325. Personnel costs accounted for 80% of total expenditures, followed by laboratory expenses (12%). Personnel cost was distributed between disease intervention specialist patient navigators (51%), nonclinical (37%), and management (12%) staff. General administration was the costliest programmatic activity (37%), followed by case management and field services (37%), and study activities (11%). The estimated average cost per patient tested was $2242.
CONCLUSIONS: Finding positive peer cases in nonclinical settings is costly but may be crucial for limiting the spread of sexually transmitted diseases. The cost of staff was the major driver. This study demonstrates that using a network strategy can be a cost-effective way to identify, test, and refer patients at high risk of syphilis and HIV infections to care.