IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0177108.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The case for investing in the male condom

Author

Listed:
  • John Stover
  • James E Rosen
  • Maria Nadia Carvalho
  • Eline L Korenromp
  • Howard S Friedman
  • Matthew Cogan
  • Bidia Deperthes

Abstract

When used correctly and consistently, the male condom offers triple protection from unintended pregnancy and the transmission of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). However, with health funding levels stagnant or falling, it is important to understand the cost and health impact associated with prevention technologies. This study is one of the first to attempt to quantify the cost and combined health impact of condom use, as a means to prevent unwanted pregnancy and to prevent transmission of STIs including HIV. This paper describes the analysis to make the case for investment in the male condom, including the cost, impact and cost-effectiveness by three scenarios (low in which 2015 condom use levels are maintained; medium in which condom use trends are used to predict condom use from 2016–2030; and high in which condom use is scaled up, as part of a package of contraceptives, to meet all unmet need for family planning by 2030 and to 90% for HIV and STI prevention by 2016) for 81 countries from 2015–2030. An annual gap between current and desired use of 10.9 billion condoms was identified (4.6 billion for family planning and 6.3 billion for HIV and STIs). Under a high scenario that completely reduces that gap between current and desired use of 10.9 billion condoms, we found that by 2030 countries could avert 240 million DALYs. The additional cost in the 81 countries through 2030 under the medium scenario is $1.9 billion, and $27.5 billion under the high scenario. Through 2030, the cost-effectiveness ratios are $304 per DALY averted for the medium and $115 per DALY averted for the high scenario. Under the three scenarios described above, our analysis demonstrates the cost-effectiveness of the male condom in preventing unintended pregnancy and HIV and STI new infections. Policy makers should increase budgets for condom programming to increase the health return on investment of scarce resources.

Suggested Citation

  • John Stover & James E Rosen & Maria Nadia Carvalho & Eline L Korenromp & Howard S Friedman & Matthew Cogan & Bidia Deperthes, 2017. "The case for investing in the male condom," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(5), pages 1-16, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0177108
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0177108
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177108
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177108&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0177108?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Rodolfo Manuelli & Emircan Yurdagul, 2021. "AIDS, Human Capital and Development," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 42, pages 178-193, October.
    2. Rodolfo Manuelli & Emircan Yurdagul, 2021. "AIDS, Human Capital and Development," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 42, pages 178-193, October.
    3. William Evans & Kuyosh Kadirov & Ibou Thior & Ramakrishnan Ganesan & Alec Ulasevich & Bidia Deperthes, 2018. "Willingness to Pay for Condoms among Men in Sub-Saharan Africa," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(1), pages 1-11, December.

    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:pone00:0177108. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.