IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aphecp/v22y2024i5d10.1007_s40258-024-00889-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-Effectiveness of Test-and-Treat Strategies to Reduce the Antibiotic Prescription Rate for Acute Febrile Illness in Primary Healthcare Clinics in Africa

Author

Listed:
  • Pim W. M. Dorst

    (University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen
    Health-Ecore Ltd.
    University Medical Center Groningen)

  • Simon Pol

    (University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen
    Health-Ecore Ltd.)

  • Piero Olliaro

    (University of Oxford)

  • Sabine Dittrich

    (FIND
    University of Oxford
    Deggendorf Institute of Technology, European Campus Rottal Inn)

  • Juvenal Nkeramahame

    (FIND)

  • Maarten J. Postma

    (University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen
    Health-Ecore Ltd.
    University of Groningen
    Universitas Airlangga)

  • Cornelis Boersma

    (University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen
    Health-Ecore Ltd.
    Open University)

  • Antoinette D. I. Asselt

    (University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen
    University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen)

Abstract

Background Inappropriate antibiotic use increases selective pressure, contributing to antimicrobial resistance. Point-of-care rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) would be instrumental to better target antibiotic prescriptions, but widespread implementation of diagnostics for improved management of febrile illnesses is limited. Objective Our study aims to contribute to evidence-based guidance to inform policymakers on investment decisions regarding interventions that foster more appropriate antibiotic prescriptions, as well as to address the evidence gap on the potential clinical and economic impact of RDTs on antibiotic prescription. Methods A country-based cost-effectiveness model was developed for Burkina Faso, Ghana and Uganda. The decision tree model simulated seven test strategies for patients with febrile illness to assess the effect of different RDT combinations on antibiotic prescription rate (APR), costs and clinical outcomes. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was expressed as the incremental cost per percentage point (ppt) reduction in APR. Results For Burkina Faso and Uganda, testing all patients with a malaria RDT was dominant compared to standard-of-care (SoC) (which included malaria testing). Expanding the test panel with a C-reactive protein (CRP) test resulted in an ICER of $ 0.03 and $ 0.08 per ppt reduction in APR for Burkina Faso and Uganda, respectively. For Ghana, the pairwise comparison with SoC—including malaria and complete blood count testing—indicates that both testing with malaria RDT only and malaria RDT + CRP are dominant. Conclusion The use of RDTs for patients with febrile illness could effectively reduce APR at minimal additional costs, provided diagnostic algorithms are adhered to. Complementing SoC with CRP testing may increase clinicians’ confidence in prescribing decisions and is a favourable strategy.

Suggested Citation

  • Pim W. M. Dorst & Simon Pol & Piero Olliaro & Sabine Dittrich & Juvenal Nkeramahame & Maarten J. Postma & Cornelis Boersma & Antoinette D. I. Asselt, 2024. "Cost-Effectiveness of Test-and-Treat Strategies to Reduce the Antibiotic Prescription Rate for Acute Febrile Illness in Primary Healthcare Clinics in Africa," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 701-715, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:22:y:2024:i:5:d:10.1007_s40258-024-00889-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s40258-024-00889-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40258-024-00889-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40258-024-00889-x?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
    ---><---

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

    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:spr:aphecp:v:22:y:2024:i:5:d:10.1007_s40258-024-00889-x. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.