IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pgph00/0005772.html

Economic impact of a large-scale scabies upsurge on healthcare facilities in Rohingya refugee camps: A retrospective costing study

Author

Listed:
  • Charls Erik Halder
  • Md Abeed Hasan
  • James Charles Okello
  • Sayed Sunny Uz Zaman
  • Julekha Tabassum Poly
  • Hamim Tassdik
  • Dickson Wafula Barasa
  • Emmanuel Roba Soma
  • Md Farhad Hussain
  • U Maung Prue
  • Sirajul Munir Khandokar
  • John Patrick Almedia
  • Jahangir Alam

Abstract

Scabies is one of the common infectious skin conditions globally, with a significantly high burden in hot and tropical countries, and resource-poor settings. Rohingya refugee camps in Cox’s Bazar are one of the most protracted refugee crises in the world, sheltering approximately 1,143,096 refugees. While most existing literature focuses on mass drug administration (MDA) interventions or community-level estimates, the economic burden of scabies on health system is rarely studied. This is a retrospective costing study, where we used financial and epidemiological data from January 2021 to December 2024. Costing was done from the provider's perspective, focused on what International Organization for Migration (IOM) spent during the period as a health service provider. A combination of standard stepdown approach and micro-costing methods were used. Financial data were collected from the IOM health programme’s annual budget and consumption reports. The study population included all individuals who were clinically diagnosed with scabies and received care at 35 IOM-supported health facilities in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh. The overall estimated financial cost for IOM’s scabies outbreak response was USD 2.12 million, with an annual average of USD 531,729. The average cost per scabies management ranged between USD 5.33 and USD 6.54. Drug costs accounted for 11.92% of the overall cost over 4 years. Of the total cost of USD 253,629.43 over 4 years, 79% was attributed to permethrin topical cream, which was used to manage an estimated 85% of the total managed cases. Scenario analyses demonstrates that the existing permethrin-based treatment preference is the most expensive treatment modality, compared with ivermectin-based treatment and mixed-treatment approaches. Although the average cost of treating scabies is relatively low, overall, the treatment cost for such a large population has a significant economic impact. This study found a substantial effect of MDA on reducing the financial burden on the healthcare system.

Suggested Citation

  • Charls Erik Halder & Md Abeed Hasan & James Charles Okello & Sayed Sunny Uz Zaman & Julekha Tabassum Poly & Hamim Tassdik & Dickson Wafula Barasa & Emmanuel Roba Soma & Md Farhad Hussain & U Maung Pru, 2026. "Economic impact of a large-scale scabies upsurge on healthcare facilities in Rohingya refugee camps: A retrospective costing study," PLOS Global Public Health, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(4), pages 1-11, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pgph00:0005772
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0005772
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0005772
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pgph.0005772&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pgph.0005772?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
    ---><---

    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:pgph00:0005772. 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: globalpubhealth (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/globalpublichealth .

    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.