Cost-effectiveness Of Rapid Diagnostic Tests Research Articles

Cost-effectiveness of rapid diagnostic tests, compared to microscopic tests, for the diagnosis and treatment of gestational malaria in Colombia from an institutional perspective

BackgroundGestational malaria is associated with negative outcomes in maternal and gestational health; timely diagnosis is crucial to avoid complications. However, the limited infrastructure, equipment, test reagents, and trained staff make it difficult to use thick blood smear tests in rural areas, where rapid testing could be a viable alternative. The purpose of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of rapid tests type III (Plasmodium falciparum/Plasmodium spp P.f/pan) versus microscopic tests for the diagnosis and treatment of gestational malaria in Colombia.MethodsCost-effectiveness analyses of gestational malaria diagnosis from an institutional perspective using a decision tree. Standard costing was performed for the identification, measurement and assessment phases, with data from Colombian tariff manuals. The data was collected from Health Situation Analysis, SIVIGILA and meta-analysis. Average and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were estimated. The uncertainty was assessed through probabilistic sensitivity analysis.ResultsThe cost of rapid diagnostic tests in 3,000 pregnant women with malaria was US$66,936 and 1,182 disability adjusted life years (DALYs) were estimated. The cost using thick blood smear tests was US$50,838 and 1,023 DALYs, for an incremental cost-effectiveness of US$ 101.2. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis of rapid diagnostic tests determined that they are highly cost-effective in 70% of the cases, even below the US$1,200 threshold; also, they showed an incremental net monetary benefit of $150,000 when payer’s willingness is US$1,000.ConclusionThe use of rapid diagnostic tests for timely diagnosis and treatment of gestational malaria is a highly cost-effective strategy in Colombia, with uncertainty analyses supporting the robustness of this conclusion and the increased net monetary benefit that the health system would obtain. This strategy may help in preventing the negative effects on maternal health and the neonate at a low cost.

A comparative analysis of costs of single and dual rapid HIV and syphilis diagnostics: results from a randomised controlled trial in Colombia

BackgroundHIV and congenital syphilis are major public health burdens contributing to substantial perinatal morbidity and mortality globally. Although studies have reported on the costs and cost-effectiveness of rapid diagnostic tests...

Over-diagnosis of malaria by microscopy in the Kilombero Valley, Southern Tanzania: an evaluation of the utility and cost-effectiveness of rapid diagnostic tests

BackgroundEarly and accurate diagnosis of febrile patients is essential to treat uncomplicated malaria cases properly, prevent severe malaria, and avert unnecessary anti-malarial treatments. Improper use of anti-malarials increases the risk of adverse drug reaction and the evolution of drug/parasite resistance. While microscopy is the most common form of malaria diagnosis, concerns over its accuracy have prompted the incorporation of malaria rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) into many national malaria control programmes.MethodsOver a three-month period, a direct comparison between microscopy and RDTs was made in a rural, private dispensary in the Kilombero Valley, Morogoro District, southern Tanzania, with the aim of estimating the extent of malaria over-diagnosis and over-treatment with anti-malarials. The study cohort was made up of patients referred by the dispensary’s clinician for malaria testing. One hundred percent of patients approached agreed to participate in this study and were then tested using both microscopy and RDTs. Using the results from the comparison of the two tests at this dispensary, the potential cost effectiveness of introducing RDTs to a neighbouring public health centre was estimated on the basis of this centre’s past malaria records spanning December 2007 to August 2011.ResultsAt the private dispensary, the apparent prevalence of malaria was 78% based on microscopy whereas the true prevalence, calculated using RDTs as the gold standard, was estimated at 14%. This discrepancy indicates that when using microscopy as the sole diagnostic test, malaria is being over-diagnosed by approximately a factor of five in this setting. At the public clinic, apparent malaria prevalence based on microscopy was 74%. If similar rates of over-diagnosis are assumed, 5,285 patients of the 6,769 patients positively diagnosed with malaria using microscopy were likely given unnecessary anti-malarials, and their true cause of illness was not addressed. The introduction of RDTs to the public clinic would be highly cost-efficient, with an estimated net saving of over 96 USD/month.ConclusionsCompared with RDTs, microscopy led to almost four out of five patients being over-diagnosed with malaria in this rural part of Tanzania. A policy that encompasses both the private and public sectors of health care is needed to ensure quality diagnostic testing for febrile patients. With estimated prevalence at 14%, RDT introduction is recommended given WHO findings that RDTs are predicted to be cost-effective in prevalence areas of less than 20%. The use of RDTs in malaria diagnosis would not only reduce government spending but would prove beneficial to ensuring appropriate care and treatment of febrile illness.

A comparative laboratory diagnosis of malaria: microscopy versus rapid diagnostic test kits

ObjectiveTo compare the two methods of rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) and microscopy in the diagnosis of malaria. MethodsRDTs and microscopy were carried out to diagnose malaria. Percentage malaria parasitaemia was calculated on thin films and all non-acute cases of plasmodiasis with less than 0.001% malaria parasitaemia were regarded as negative. Results were simply presented as percentage positive of the total number of patients under study. The results of RDTs were compared to those of microscopy while those of RDTs based on antigen were compared to those of RDTs based on antibody. Patients' follow-up was made for all cases. ResultsAll the 200 patients under present study tested positive to RDTs based on malaria antibodies (serum) method (100%). 128 out of 200 tested positive to RDTs based on malaria antigen (whole blood) method (64%), while 118 out of 200 patients under present study tested positive to visual microscopy of Lieshman and diluted Giemsa (59%). All patients that tested positive to microscopy also tested positive to RDTs based on antigen. All patients on the second day of follow-up were non-febrile and had antimalaria drugs. ConclusionsWe conclude based on the present study that the RDTs based on malaria antigen (whole blood) method is as specific as the traditional microscopy and even appears more sensitive than microscopy. The RDTs based on antibody (serum) method is unspecific thus it should not be encouraged. It is most likely that Africa being an endemic region, formation of certain levels of malaria antibody may not be uncommon. The present study also supports the opinion that a good number of febrile cases is not due to malaria. We support WHO's report on cost effectiveness of RDTs but, recommend that only the antigen based method should possibly, be adopted in Africa and other malaria endemic regions of the world.

Cost-effectiveness of malaria diagnostic methods in sub-Saharan Africa in an era of combination therapy

To evaluate the relative cost-effectiveness in different sub-Saharan African settings of presumptive treatment, field-standard microscopy and rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) to diagnose malaria. We used a decision tree model and probabilistic sensitivity analysis applied to outpatients presenting at rural health facilities with suspected malaria. Costs and effects encompassed those for both patients positive on RDT (assuming artemisinin-based combination therapy) and febrile patients negative on RDT (assuming antibiotic treatment). Interventions were defined as cost-effective if they were less costly and more effective or had an incremental cost per disability-adjusted life year averted of less than US$ 150. Data were drawn from published and unpublished sources, supplemented with expert opinion. RDTs were cost-effective compared with presumptive treatment up to high prevalences of Plasmodium falciparum parasitaemia. Decision-makers can be at least 50% confident of this result below 81% malaria prevalence, and 95% confident below 62% prevalence, a level seldom exceeded in practice. RDTs were more than 50% likely to be cost-saving below 58% prevalence. Relative to microscopy, RDTs were more than 85% likely to be cost-effective across all prevalence levels, reflecting their expected better accuracy under real-life conditions. Results were robust to extensive sensitivity analysis. The cost-effectiveness of RDTs mainly reflected improved treatment and health outcomes for non-malarial febrile illness, plus savings in antimalarial drug costs. Results were dependent on the assumption that prescribers used test results to guide treatment decisions. RDTs have the potential to be cost-effective in most parts of sub-Saharan Africa. Appropriate management of malaria and non-malarial febrile illnesses is required to reap the full benefits of these tests.

The Cost-Effectiveness of Parasitologic Diagnosis for Malaria-Suspected Patients in an Era of Combination Therapy

The introduction of artemisinin-based combination therapy in sub-Saharan Africa has prompted calls for increased use of parasitologic diagnosis for malaria. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) in comparison to microscopy in guiding treatment of non-severe febrile illness at varying levels of malaria endemicity using data on test accuracy and costs collected as part of a Tanzanian trial. If prescribers complied with current guidelines, microscopy would give rise to lower average costs per patient correctly treated than RDTs in areas of both high and low transmission. RDT introduction would result in an additional 2.3% and 9.4% of patients correctly treated, at an incremental cost of $25 and $7 in the low and high transmission settings, respectively. Cost-effectiveness would be worse if prescribers do not comply with test results. The cost of this additional benefit may be higher than many countries can afford without external assistance or lower RDT prices.

A systematic review of the clinical, public health and cost-effectiveness of rapid diagnostic tests for the detection and identification of bacterial intestinal pathogens in faeces and food

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of tests for the rapid diagnosis of bacterial food poisoning in clinical and public health practice and to estimate the cost-effectiveness of these assays in a hypothetical population in order to inform policy on the use of these tests. Studies evaluating diagnostic accuracy of rapid tests were retrieved using electronic databases and handsearching reference lists and key journals. Hospital laboratories and test manufacturers were contacted for cost data, and clinicians involved in the care of patients with food poisoning were invited to discuss the conclusions of this review using the nominal group technique. A systematic review of the current medical literature on assays used for the rapid diagnosis of bacterial food poisoning was carried out. Specific organisms under review were Salmonella, Campylobacter, Escherichia coli O157, Staphylococcus aureus, Clostridium perfringens and Bacillus cereus. Data extraction was undertaken using standardised data extraction forms. Where a sufficient number of studies evaluating comparable tests were identified, meta-analysis was performed. A decision analytic model was developed, using effectiveness data from the review and cost data from hospitals and manufacturers, which contributed to an assessment of the cost-effectiveness of rapid tests in a hypothetical UK population. Finally, diagnostic accuracy and cost-effectiveness results were presented to a focus group of GPs, microbiologists and consultants in communicable disease control, to assess professional opinion on the use of rapid tests in the diagnosis of food poisoning. Good test performance levels were observed with rapid test methods, especially for polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays. The estimated levels of diagnostic accuracy using the area under the curve of the summary receiver operating characteristic curve was very high. Indeed, although traditional culture is the natural reference test to use for comparative statistical analysis, on many occasions the rapid test outperforms culture, detecting additional 'truly' positive cases of food-borne illness. The significance of these additional positives requires further investigation. Economic modelling suggests that adoption of rapid tests in combination with routine culture is unlikely to be cost-effective, however, as the cost of rapid technologies decreases; total replacement with rapid technologies may be feasible. Despite the relatively poor quality of reporting of studies evaluating rapid detection methods, the reviewed evidence shows that PCR for Campylobacter, Salmonella and E. coli O157 is potentially very successful in identifying pathogens, possibly detecting more than the number currently reported using culture. Less is known about the benefits of testing for B. cereus, C. perfringens and S. aureus. Further investigation is needed on how clinical outcomes may be altered if test results are available more quickly and at a greater precision than in the current practice of bacterial culture.