IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0228216.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Standardized framework for evaluating costs of active case-finding programs: An analysis of two programs in Cambodia and Tajikistan

Author

Listed:
  • Youngji Jo
  • Farangiz Mirzoeva
  • Monyrath Chry
  • Zhi Zhen Qin
  • Andrew Codlin
  • Oktam Bobokhojaev
  • Jacob Creswell
  • Hojoon Sohn

Abstract

Introduction: Over the years, technological and process innovations enabled active case finding (ACF) programs to expand their capacities and scope to have evolved to close gaps in missing TB patients globally. However, with increased ACF program’s operational complexity and a need for significant resource commitments, a comprehensive, transparent, and standardized approach in evaluating costs of ACF programs is needed to properly determine costs and value of ACF programs. Methods: Based on reviews of program activity and financial reports, multiple interviews with program managers of two TB REACH funded ACF programs deployed in Cambodia and Tajikistan, we first identified common program components, which formed the basis of the cost data collection, analysis, reporting framework. Within each program component and sub-activity group, cost data were collected and organized by relevant resource types (human resource, capital, recurrent, and overhead costs). Total shared, indirect and overhead costs were apportioned into each activity category based on direct human resource contribution (e.g. a number of staff and their relative level of effort dedicated to each program component). Capital assets were assessed specific to program components and were annualized based on their expected useful life and a 3% discount rate. All costs were assessed based on the service provider perspective and expressed in 2015 USD. Results: Over the two program years (April 2013 to December 2015), the Cambodia and Tajikistan ACF programs cumulated a total cost of $336,951 and $771,429 to screen 68,846 and 1,980,516 target population, bacteriologically test 4,589 and 19,764 presumptive TB, diagnose 731 and 2,246 TB patients in the respective programs. Recurrent costs were the largest cost components (54% and 34%) of the total costs for the respective programs and Xpert MTB/RIF (Xpert) testing incurred largest program component/activity cost for both programs. Cost per screening was $0.63 and $0.10 and cost per Xpert test was $25 and $18; Cost per TB case detected (Xpert) was $373 and $343 in Cambodia and Tajikistan. Conclusions: Results from two contextually and programmatically different multi-component ACF programs demonstrate that our tool is fully capable of comprehensively and transparently evaluating and comparing costs of various ACF programs.

Suggested Citation

  • Youngji Jo & Farangiz Mirzoeva & Monyrath Chry & Zhi Zhen Qin & Andrew Codlin & Oktam Bobokhojaev & Jacob Creswell & Hojoon Sohn, 2020. "Standardized framework for evaluating costs of active case-finding programs: An analysis of two programs in Cambodia and Tajikistan," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-12, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0228216
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0228216
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0228216
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0228216&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0228216?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sarah Wood Pallas & Marissa Courey & Chhaily Hy & Wm. Perry Killam & Dora Warren & Brittany Moore, 2018. "Cost Analysis of Tuberculosis Diagnosis in Cambodia with and without Xpert® MTB/RIF for People Living with HIV/AIDS and People with Presumptive Multidrug-resistant Tuberculosis," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 537-548, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Patricia Turimumahoro & Austin Tucker & Amanda J Gupta & Radhika P Tampi & Diana Babirye & Emmanuel Ochom & Joseph M Ggita & Irene Ayakaka & Hojoon Sohn & Achilles Katamba & David Dowdy & J Lucian Dav, 2022. "A cost analysis of implementing mobile health facilitated tuberculosis contact investigation in a low-income setting," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(4), pages 1-13, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Eva Glaeser & Bart Jacobs & Bernd Appelt & Elias Engelking & Ir Por & Kunthea Yem & Steffen Flessa, 2020. "Costing of Cesarean Sections in a Government and a Non-Governmental Hospital in Cambodia—A Prerequisite for Efficient and Fair Comprehensive Obstetric Care," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(21), pages 1-15, November.
    2. Alvin Kuo Jing Teo & Kiesha Prem & Yi Wang & Tripti Pande & Marina Smelyanskaya & Lisanne Gerstel & Monyrath Chry & Sovannary Tuot & Siyan Yi, 2021. "Economic Evaluation of Community Tuberculosis Active Case-Finding Approaches in Cambodia: A Quasi-Experimental Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-16, December.

    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:pone00:0228216. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.