Community A. aegypti control in Cuba of benefit
- PDF / 155,301 Bytes
- 1 Pages / 623.591 x 841.847 pts Page_size
- 80 Downloads / 231 Views
Health system Vertical programme Community Society a
Intervention: total costs ($US)
Control: total costs ($US)
Incremental cost per focus eliminated ($US)
442 483 364 796
656 680 552 644
26 775 23 481
249 808 692 291
168 629 825 309
–10 147a 16 628
in favour of the control area
At baseline, the numbers of foci (any container containing a larval stage of A. aegypti) reported in the intervention and control areas were 614 and 632, respectively. Throughout the intervention period, the number of foci in each area was reduced by 459 and 467, respectively. The additional cost from the health system perspective in the control area was $US214 198, compared with the intervention area.* With the exception of social communication costs, all provider costs were higher in the control area than in the intervention area. However, the additional cost from the community perspective was $US81 179 in the intervention area, compared with the control area. Community-based intervention was more cost effective than the vertical control programme from the societal, health system and vertical programme perspectives [see table]. * Costs (2002 values) were evaluated from the perspective of the health system provider, the vertical programme, a community perspective and the societal perspective. The costs included those associated with labour, consumables, training and social communication, operating expenses and capital goods; capital costs were discounted at 6% per annum. Baly A, et al. Cost effectiveness of Aedes aegypti control programmes: participatory versus vertical. Transactions of the Royal Society of Tropical 801078121 Medicine and Hygiene 101: 578-586, No. 6, Jun 2007
1173-5503/10/0533-0001/$14.95 Adis © 2010 Springer International Publishing AG. All rights reserved
PharmacoEconomics & Outcomes News 28 Jul 2007 No. 533
1
Data Loading...
