IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v59y2004i3p525-539.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-effectiveness of malaria control interventions when malaria mortality is low: insecticide-treated nets versus in-house residual spraying in India

Author

Listed:
  • Bhatia, Mrigesh R
  • Fox-Rushby, Julia
  • Mills, Anne

Abstract

Malaria is one of the leading causes of morbidity and mortality in the developing world and a major public health problem in India. Disillusioned by in-house residual spraying (IRS), and increasingly aware that insecticide-treated nets (ITNs) have proved to be effective in reducing malaria mortality and morbidity in various epidemiological settings, policy-makers in India are keen to identify which is the more cost-effective malaria control intervention. A community randomised controlled trial was set up in Surat to compare the effectiveness and efficiency of IRS and ITNs. Both control strategies were shown to be effective in preventing malaria over the base-case scenario of early diagnosis and prompt treatment. The mean costs per case averted for ITNs was statistically significantly lower (Rs. 1848, 1567-2209; US$ 52) than IRS (Rs. 3121, 2386-4177, US$ 87). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for ITNs over IRS was Rs. 799 (US$ 22). The conclusions were robust to changes in assumptions. This study expands the scope of recent comparative economic evaluations of ITNs and IRS, since it was carried out in a low mortality malaria endemic area.

Suggested Citation

  • Bhatia, Mrigesh R & Fox-Rushby, Julia & Mills, Anne, 2004. "Cost-effectiveness of malaria control interventions when malaria mortality is low: insecticide-treated nets versus in-house residual spraying in India," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 59(3), pages 525-539, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:59:y:2004:i:3:p:525-539
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(03)00588-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Natasha Howard & Lorna Guinness & Mark Rowland & Naeem Durrani & Kristian S Hansen, 2017. "Cost-effectiveness of adding indoor residual spraying to case management in Afghan refugee settlements in Northwest Pakistan during a prolonged malaria epidemic," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-18, October.
    2. Frank Pega & Nick Wilson, 2016. "A Systematic Review of Health Economic Analyses of Housing Improvement Interventions and Insecticide-Treated Bednets in the Home," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(6), pages 1-29, June.
    3. Shankar Prinja & Akashdeep Chauhan & Blake Angell & Indrani Gupta & Stephen Jan, 2015. "A Systematic Review of the State of Economic Evaluation for Health Care in India," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 13(6), pages 595-613, December.
    4. Voahirana T Andrianantoandro & Martine Audibert & Thomas Kesteman & Léonora Ravolanjarasoa & Milijaona Randrianarivelojosia & Christophe Rogier & Milijaona Randrianarivelojosia Researcher, 2021. "Cost of the national malaria control program and cost-effectiveness of indoor residual spraying and insecticide-treated bed nets strategies in two districts of Madagascar," Working Papers hal-03249411, HAL.
    5. Chow, Jeffrey & Darley, Sarah R. & Laxminarayan, Ramanan, 2007. "Cost-effectiveness of Disease Interventions in India," RFF Working Paper Series dp-07-53, Resources for the Future.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:59:y:2004:i:3:p:525-539. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.