Contraception · 2021
Economic evaluation of Zika Contraception Access Network in Puerto Rico during the 2016-17 Zika virus outbreak.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства 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.
Li Rui, Ellington Sascha R, Galang Romeo R, Grosse Scott D, Mendoza Zipatly, Hurst Stacey, Vale Yari, Lathrop Eva, Romero Lisa
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: During the 2016-2017 Zika virus (ZIKV) outbreak, the prevention of unintended pregnancies was identified as a primary strategy to prevent birth defects. This study estimated the cost-effectiveness of the Zika Contraception Access Network (Z-CAN), an emergency response intervention that provided women in Puerto Rico with access to the full range of reversible contraception at no cost and compared results with a preimplementation hypothetical cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA).
STUDY DESIGN: We evaluated costs and outcomes of Z-CAN from a health sector perspective compared to no intervention using a decision tree model. Number of people served, contraception methods mix, and costs under Z-CAN were from actual program data and other input parameters were from the literature. Health outcome measures included the number of Zika-associated microcephaly (ZAM) cases and unintended pregnancies. The economic benefits of the Z-CAN intervention were ZIKV-associated direct costs avoided, including lifetime medical and supportive costs associated with ZAM cases, costs of monitoring ZIKV-exposed pregnancies and infants born from Zika-virus infected mothers, and the costs of unintended pregnancies prevented during the outbreak as a result of increased contraception use through the Z-CAN intervention.
RESULTS: The Z-CAN intervention cost a total of $26.1 million, including costs for the full range of reversible contraceptive methods, contraception related services, and programmatic activities. The program is estimated to have prevented 85% of cases of estimated ZAM cases and unintended pregnancies in the absence of Z-CAN. The intervention cost was projected to have been more than offset by $79.9 million in ZIKV-associated costs avoided, 96% of which were lifetime ZAM-associated costs, as well as $137.0 million from avoided unintended pregnancies, with total net savings in one year of $216.9 million. The results were consistent with the previous CEA study.
CONCLUSION: Z-CAN was likely cost-saving in the context of a public health emergency response setting.
STUDY DESIGN: We evaluated costs and outcomes of Z-CAN from a health sector perspective compared to no intervention using a decision tree model. Number of people served, contraception methods mix, and costs under Z-CAN were from actual program data and other input parameters were from the literature. Health outcome measures included the number of Zika-associated microcephaly (ZAM) cases and unintended pregnancies. The economic benefits of the Z-CAN intervention were ZIKV-associated direct costs avoided, including lifetime medical and supportive costs associated with ZAM cases, costs of monitoring ZIKV-exposed pregnancies and infants born from Zika-virus infected mothers, and the costs of unintended pregnancies prevented during the outbreak as a result of increased contraception use through the Z-CAN intervention.
RESULTS: The Z-CAN intervention cost a total of $26.1 million, including costs for the full range of reversible contraceptive methods, contraception related services, and programmatic activities. The program is estimated to have prevented 85% of cases of estimated ZAM cases and unintended pregnancies in the absence of Z-CAN. The intervention cost was projected to have been more than offset by $79.9 million in ZIKV-associated costs avoided, 96% of which were lifetime ZAM-associated costs, as well as $137.0 million from avoided unintended pregnancies, with total net savings in one year of $216.9 million. The results were consistent with the previous CEA study.
CONCLUSION: Z-CAN was likely cost-saving in the context of a public health emergency response setting.