IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pntd00/0005934.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How much will it cost to eradicate lymphatic filariasis? An analysis of the financial and economic costs of intensified efforts against lymphatic filariasis

Author

Listed:
  • Randee J Kastner
  • Elisa Sicuri
  • Christopher M Stone
  • Gabriel Matwale
  • Ambrose Onapa
  • Fabrizio Tediosi

Abstract

Introduction: Lymphatic filariasis (LF), a neglected tropical disease (NTD) preventable through mass drug administration (MDA), is one of six diseases deemed possibly eradicable. Previously we developed one LF elimination scenario, which assumes MDA scale-up to continue in all countries that have previously undertaken MDA. In contrast, our three previously developed eradication scenarios assume all LF endemic countries will undertake MDA at an average (eradication I), fast (eradication II), or instantaneous (eradication III) rate of scale-up. In this analysis we use a micro-costing model to project the financial and economic costs of each of these scenarios in order to provide evidence to decision makers about the investment required to eliminate and eradicate LF. Methodology/Key findings: Costing was undertaken from a health system perspective, with all results expressed in 2012 US dollars (USD). A discount rate of 3% was applied to calculate the net present value of future costs. Prospective NTD budgets from LF endemic countries were reviewed to preliminarily determine activities and resources necessary to undertake a program to eliminate LF at a country level. In consultation with LF program experts, activities and resources were further reviewed and a refined list of activities and necessary resources, along with their associated quantities and costs, were determined and grouped into the following activities: advocacy and communication, capacity strengthening, coordination and strengthening partnerships, data management, ongoing surveillance, monitoring and supervision, drug delivery, and administration. The costs of mapping and undertaking transmission assessment surveys and the value of donated drugs and volunteer time were also accounted for. Using previously developed scenarios and deterministic estimates of MDA duration, the financial and economic costs of interrupting LF transmission under varying rates of MDA scale-up were then modelled using a micro-costing approach. The elimination scenario, which includes countries that previously undertook MDA, is estimated to cost 929 million USD (95% Credible Interval: 884m-972m). Proceeding to eradication is anticipated to require a higher financial investment, estimated at 1.24 billion USD (1.17bn-1.30bn) in the eradication III scenario (immediate scale-up), with eradication II (intensified scale-up) projected at 1.27 billion USD (1.21bn-1.33bn), and eradication I (slow scale-up) estimated at 1.29 billion USD (1.23bn-1.34bn). The economic costs of the eradication III scenario are estimated at approximately 7.57 billion USD (7.12bn-7.94bn), while the elimination scenario is projected to have an economic cost of 5.21 billion USD (4.91bn-5.45bn). Countries in the AFRO region will require the greatest investment to reach elimination or eradication, but also stand to gain the most in cost savings. Across all scenarios, capacity strengthening and advocacy and communication represent the greatest financial costs, whereas mapping, post-MDA surveillance, and administration comprise the least. Conclusions/Significance: Though challenging to implement, our results indicate that financial and economic savings are greatest under the eradication III scenario. Thus, if eradication for LF is the objective, accelerated scale-up is projected to be the best investment. Author summary: Lymphatic filariasis (LF) is a neglected tropical disease (NTD) that is targeted for elimination and is thought to be potentially eradicable through once yearly mass drug administration (MDA) using drugs that are currently donated to LF endemic countries by the pharmaceutical companies that manufacture them. MDA has proven to be a cost-effective and efficient method of disease control, both for LF and other NTDs. Previously, we developed scale-up scenarios of varying magnitude to reach elimination (elimination of LF in all countries that have previously undertaken MDA) and eradication (local elimination of LF in all LF endemic countries) and estimated the number of associated treatments that would be necessary in each country under each scenario. Here we project the costs—both financial and economic—of each of these scenarios. We use data from a myriad of sources to estimate the cost of various activities, and found that training and advocacy and communication activities comprise the bulk of the costs of the program. Among all scenarios, elimination requires the least total investment. However, in terms of LF eradication, faster rates of MDA scale-up are associated with decreased overall costs.

Suggested Citation

  • Randee J Kastner & Elisa Sicuri & Christopher M Stone & Gabriel Matwale & Ambrose Onapa & Fabrizio Tediosi, 2017. "How much will it cost to eradicate lymphatic filariasis? An analysis of the financial and economic costs of intensified efforts against lymphatic filariasis," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-20, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pntd00:0005934
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pntd.0005934
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0005934
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0005934&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pntd.0005934?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Edward Miguel & Michael Kremer, 2004. "Worms: Identifying Impacts on Education and Health in the Presence of Treatment Externalities," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(1), pages 159-217, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Laia Cirera & Beatriz Galatas & Sergi Alonso & Krijn Paaijmans & Miler Mamuquele & Helena Martí-Soler & Caterina Guinovart & Humberto Munguambe & Fabião Luis & Hoticha Nhantumbo & Júlia Montañà & Quiq, 2020. "Moving towards malaria elimination in southern Mozambique: Cost and cost-effectiveness of mass drug administration combined with intensified malaria control," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-17, July.
    2. Mousab Siddig Elhag & Yan Jin & Mutamad Ahmad Amin & Hassan Ahmed Hassan Ahmed Ismail & Sung-Tae Hong & Hae In Jang & Youngah Doh & Seungman Cha, 2020. "Cost and logistics implications of a nationwide survey of schistosomiasis and other intestinal helminthiases in Sudan: Key activities and cost components," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-18, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. S Anukriti & Catalina Herrera‐Almanza & Praveen K. Pathak & Mahesh Karra, 2020. "Curse of the Mummy‐ji: The Influence of Mothers‐in‐Law on Women in India†," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 102(5), pages 1328-1351, October.
    2. Gustavo J. Bobonis & Paul J. Gertler & Marco Gonzalez-Navarro & Simeon Nichter, 2022. "Vulnerability and Clientelism," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(11), pages 3627-3659, November.
    3. David K. Evans & Arkadipta Ghosh, 2008. "Prioritizing Educational Investments in Children in the Developing World," Working Papers WR-587, RAND Corporation.
    4. Michael A. Clemens, 2017. "The Meaning Of Failed Replications: A Review And Proposal," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 326-342, February.
    5. Blanco, M. & Dalton, P.S. & Vargas, J.F., 2013. "Does the Unemployement Benefit Institution Affect the Productivity of Workers? Evidence from a Field Experiment," Other publications TiSEM ba37e033-06ab-4fc3-b56e-9, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    6. Battaglia, Marianna & Lebedinski, Lara, 2015. "Equal Access to Education: An Evaluation of the Roma Teaching Assistant Program in Serbia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 62-81.
    7. Karen Clay & Werner Troesken & Michael Haines, 2014. "Lead and Mortality," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 96(3), pages 458-470, July.
    8. Hoyt Bleakley, 2007. "Disease and Development: Evidence from Hookworm Eradication in the American South," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 122(1), pages 73-117.
    9. Michael Geruso & Dean Spears, 2018. "Neighborhood Sanitation and Infant Mortality," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 10(2), pages 125-162, April.
    10. Verónica Amarante & Marco Manacorda & Edward Miguel & Andrea Vigorito, 2016. "Do Cash Transfers Improve Birth Outcomes? Evidence from Matched Vital Statistics, Program, and Social Security Data," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 1-43, May.
    11. Kirill Borusyak & Peter Hull & Xavier Jaravel, 2023. "Design-Based Identification with Formula Instruments: A Review," NBER Working Papers 31393, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Margaret Triyana, 2016. "Do Health Care Providers Respond to Demand-Side Incentives? Evidence from Indonesia," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 255-288, November.
    13. Pedro Carneiro & Sokbae Lee & Daniel Wilhelm, 2020. "Optimal data collection for randomized control trials," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 23(1), pages 1-31.
    14. Mark D. Manuszak & Krzysztof Wozniak, 2017. "The Impact of Price Controls in Two-sided Markets : Evidence from US Debit Card Interchange Fee Regulation," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2017-074, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    15. Hoffmann, Bridget, 2018. "Do non-monetary prices target the poor? Evidence from a field experiment in India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 15-32.
    16. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John List & Claire Mackevicius & Min Sok Lee & Dana Suskind, 2019. "How Can Experiments Play a Greater Role in Public Policy? 12 Proposals from an Economic Model of Scaling," Artefactual Field Experiments 00679, The Field Experiments Website.
    17. Lay, Jann, 2010. "MDG Achievements, Determinants, and Resource Needs: What Has Been Learnt?," GIGA Working Papers 137, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
    18. John A. List, 2024. "Optimally generate policy-based evidence before scaling," Nature, Nature, vol. 626(7999), pages 491-499, February.
    19. McNamara, Paul E. & Ulimwengu, John M. & Leonard, Kenneth L., 2010. "Do health investments improve agricultural productivity? Lessons from agricultural household and health research," IFPRI discussion papers 1012, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    20. Annette N. Brown & Drew B. Cameron & Benjamin D. K. Wood, 2014. "Quality evidence for policymaking: I'll believe it when I see the replication," Journal of Development Effectiveness, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(3), pages 215-235, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:plo:pntd00:0005934. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: plosntds (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/ .

    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.