Mobile phone adherence support for antiretroviral therapy: What would it cost the National AIDS Control Program in India? Rodrigues R, Shet A, Swaroop N, Shastri S, Bogg L, De Costa A St. John’s National Academy of Health Sciences, National AIDS Control Organisation Bangalore, India Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden WEAE0303
17
Embed
Mobile phone adherence support for antiretroviral therapy: What would it cost the National AIDS Control Program in India? Rodrigues R, Shet A, Swaroop.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Mobile phone adherence support for antiretroviral therapy: What would it cost the
National AIDS Control Program in India?
Rodrigues R, Shet A, Swaroop N, Shastri S, Bogg L, De Costa A
St. John’s National Academy of Health Sciences, National AIDS Control Organisation
Bangalore, India Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
WEAE0303
2/17
HIV prevalence : 0.3%* People with HIV: 2.5 millionHIV patients on treatment: 0.4million#
Study Setting
INDIA
*UNAIDS. Global Report 2010, #NACO March 2012
BangalorePrivate teaching hospital withGovernment ART center
MysoreGovernment teaching hospital and ART center
3/17
Introduction
Good adherence defers failure to 1st line ART optimizes healthcare outcomes - reduces healthcare costs*
Interventions involving mobile telephones – found suitable for improving adherence#,@ – could reduce healthcare costs
*World Health Organisation (2003) Adherence to Long-term Therapies#Weltel Kenya, @Prompting medication reminders- Cameroon
4/17
Objective
To assess the cost of weekly mobile phone reminders*for adherence support in the context of the
Indian National AIDS control Program
* HIVIND trial
5/17
The Mobile Phone Intervention
Patientwith
mobile phoneOn Ry
+
Interactive Voice
ResponseCall (IVR)
Pictorial SMS
Weekly
Weekly
6/17
Assumptions
This costing was from the program perspective:
Hence,
Expenses in relation to the trial implementation were not considered
The technical providers of the intervention -considered most economical
7/17
Costing Methodology
The sequential procedure for costing was used:1. Identifying the resource used in natural units
(minutes/any other units) 2. Measuring resource use 3. Pricing the resource
Sensitivity analysis for intervention scale up: 1. Varying the number of patients (IVR+SMS)2. Varying the components of intervention
ie; (i) SMS alone (ii) IVR alone and
8/17
Costs One time costs: Costs incurred for Intervention
development
Recurrent Costs: Fixed costs: Annual maintenance fee for
Total Costs: One time cost + Fixed costs + n (variable costs)
9/17
Results
One-time costsCosts (USD)
Annualised cost (USD)
Development of the intervention 452.99/5yrs 90.60Development of the web interface 201.33/5yrs 40.27Equipment costs [1 computer (10% time) and 1 mobile phone) 664.38/5yrs 13.29Total one time costs 144.15
One time costs
10/17
Fixed costs Cost (USD)
Annualised cost (USD)
Service maintenance 603.99/year 603.99
Equipment maintenance 28.19/3years 9.40
Program manager (10% of annual time, 503.32USD/mth salary) 603.99
Overheads 201.33/year 114.40
Data manager (15min/week, 140.93USD/mth salary) 10.63
Total cost 135318.45 712282.7 963461.06Total cost/patient 2.26 1.67 1.20
Patients
Total cost of Intervention scale-up for 0.8 million patients: 0.16% of the 5year NACP VI budget
14/17
Sensitivity analysis: Cost for IVR / SMS Scale-upRegion Karnataka India IndiaLanguages 5 32 32
ART centers 44 313 313
Patients 60000 426000 800000
Intervention IVR SMS IVR SMS IVR SMS
Onetime+fixed cost (USD)
59781 59690 420169 424370 420170 424369
Variable cost/pt 1.15 0.22 0.63 0.15 0.63 0.15
Total cost (USD)* 129078 72828 688549 488951 924170 545649
Totalcost/pt (USD)
2.15 1.21 1.62 1.15 1.16 0.68
*Total cost = One time + fixed cost + n (variable cost)
15/17
Conclusion
The Indian National AIDS Control Program would incur an overall cost of 0.16% of its current 5year budget for mobile phone adherence support of ART
Given the current implementation costs, the intervention has the potential to improve health system effectiveness and enable the achievement of program goals in the Indian context
16/17
The authors declare that they have no competing interests