IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1004429.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cost-effectiveness of COVID rapid diagnostic tests for patients with severe/critical illness in low- and middle-income countries: A modeling study

Author

Listed:
  • Gabrielle Bonnet
  • John Bimba
  • Chancy Chavula
  • Harunavamwe N Chifamba
  • Titus H Divala
  • Andres G Lescano
  • Mohammed Majam
  • Danjuma Mbo
  • Auliya A Suwantika
  • Marco A Tovar
  • Pragya Yadav
  • Obinna Ekwunife
  • Collin Mangenah
  • Lucky G Ngwira
  • Elizabeth L Corbett
  • Mark Jit
  • Anna Vassall

Abstract

Background: Rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) for coronavirus disease (COVID) are used in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to inform treatment decisions. However, to date, it is unclear when this use is cost-effective. Existing analyses are limited to a narrow set of countries and uses. The aim of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of COVID RDTs to inform the treatment of patients with severe illness in LMICs, considering real world practice. Methods and findings: We assessed the cost-effectiveness of COVID testing across LMICs using a decision tree model, differentiating results by country income level, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) prevalence, and testing scenario (none, RDTs, polymerase chain reaction tests—PCRs and combinations). LMIC experts defined realistic care pathways and treatment options. Using a healthcare provider perspective and net monetary benefit approach, we assessed both intended (COVID symptom alleviation) and unintended (treatment side effects) health and economic impacts for each testing scenario. We included the side effects of corticosteroids, which are often the only available treatment for COVID. Because side effects depend both on the treatment and the patient’s underlying illness (COVID or COVID-like illnesses, such as influenza), we considered the prevalence of COVID-like illnesses in our analyses. Conclusions: COVID testing can be cost-effective to inform treatment of LMIC patients with severe COVID-like disease. The optimal algorithm is driven by country income level and health budgets, the level of suspicion that the patient may have COVID, and influenza prevalence. Further research to better characterize the unintended effects of corticosteroids, particularly on influenza cases, could improve decision making around the treatment of those with COVID-like symptoms in LMICs. Gabrielle Bonnet and team assess the cost-effectiveness of COVID testing across low-and-middle-income countries, differentiating results by country income level, SARS-CoV-2 prevalence and different testing scenarios.Why was this study done?: What did the researchers do and find?: What do these findings mean?:

Suggested Citation

  • Gabrielle Bonnet & John Bimba & Chancy Chavula & Harunavamwe N Chifamba & Titus H Divala & Andres G Lescano & Mohammed Majam & Danjuma Mbo & Auliya A Suwantika & Marco A Tovar & Pragya Yadav & Obinna , 2024. "Cost-effectiveness of COVID rapid diagnostic tests for patients with severe/critical illness in low- and middle-income countries: A modeling study," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(7), pages 1-17, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1004429
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1004429
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1004429
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1004429&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004429?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:pmed00:1004429. 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: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    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.