Costs of Transmission Assessment Surveys to Provide Evidence for the Elimination of Lymphatic Filariasis

Background: To reach the global goal of elimination of lymphatic filariasis as a public health problem by 2020, national programs will have to implement a series of transmission assessment surveys (TAS) to determine prevalence of the disease by evaluation unit. It is expected that 4,671 surveys will be required by 2020. Planning in advance for the costs associated with these surveys is essential to ensure that the required resources are available for this essential program activity. Methodology and Findings: Retrospective cost data was collected from reports from 13 countries which implemented a total of 105 TAS surveys following a standardized World Health Organization (WHO) protocol between 2012 and 2014. The median cost per survey was $21,170 (including the costs for rapid diagnostic tests [RDTs]) and $9,540 excluding those costs. Median cost per cluster sampled (without RDT costs) was $101. Analysis of costs (excluding RDTs) by category showed that the main cost drivers were personnel and travel. Conclusion: Transmission assessment surveys are critical to collect evidence to validate elimination of LF as a public health problem. National programs and donors can use the costing results to adequately plan and forecast the resources required to undertake the necessary activities to conduct high-quality transmission assessment surveys. Author Summary: As national programs are nearing elimination of lymphatic filariasis as a public health problem, questions have been raised about the cost of collecting the data necessary for documenting validation of elimination. A series of standardized population-based surveys is necessary to determine prevalence of infection in endemic areas. The authors retrospectively collected data on the costs of these surveys from 13 countries to determine median cost per survey and per cluster sampled. Costs were found to be comparable with other neglected tropical disease surveys. The major cost drivers were personnel and travel for supporting collection of data in the field. National programs and donors can use these results to plan and advocate more effectively for sufficient resources to support validation of elimination.