IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0350288.html

Economic barriers to diagnostic equity: A multi-country analysis of patient costs for rapid SARS-CoV-2 testing in sub-Saharan Africa

Author

Listed:
  • Obinna Ekwunife
  • Collin Mangenah
  • Lucky Ngwira
  • Elizabeth Corbett
  • Karin Hatzold
  • Elvis Isere
  • John Bimba
  • Euphemia Sibanda
  • Frances M Cowan
  • Godpower Omoregie
  • Gabrielle Bonnet

Abstract

While the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic has passed, understanding the economic barriers to diagnostic access remains critical for future pandemic preparedness and universal health coverage. Implementing efficient testing modalities is crucial to achieving optimal value for both clients and healthcare providers. This study examines the cost and affordability of various SARS-CoV-2 antigen rapid-diagnostic-test modalities in Nigeria, Malawi, and Zimbabwe from a client perspective, providing a blueprint for future diagnostic strategies in Sub-Saharan Africa. Testing was offered for free through professional testing and self-testing in government or NGO-led primary healthcare centers across all countries, and in community pharmacies and drug stores in Nigeria. Data were collected from October 2022 to May 2023 through a survey of a random sample of adults visiting participating sites. The survey collected patient costs, including transportation, medical and non-medical expenses, and productivity loss. Affordability was assessed by the incidence of catastrophic health expenditure (defined as costs exceeding 10% of household income). The unit patient cost of testing in Nigeria, Malawi and Zimbabwe was $4.2, $2.7 and $2.7, respectively. In Nigeria, testing in community pharmacies and drug stores was cheaper than in primary healthcare centers. Self-testing cost less than professional testing in Nigeria ($1.3 versus $9.8), but more in Zimbabwe ($3.2 versus $2.3). In Malawi, Nigeria and Zimbabwe 40.6%, 28.6%, and 5.7% of clients, respectively, faced catastrophic health expenditures. SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing imposes a significant financial burden on clients. Even “free” testing carries high indirect costs that threaten diagnostic equity. Diversified testing modalities, such as community pharmacies and drug stores, may offer lower-cost options for sustainable diagnostic integration.

Suggested Citation

  • Obinna Ekwunife & Collin Mangenah & Lucky Ngwira & Elizabeth Corbett & Karin Hatzold & Elvis Isere & John Bimba & Euphemia Sibanda & Frances M Cowan & Godpower Omoregie & Gabrielle Bonnet, 2026. "Economic barriers to diagnostic equity: A multi-country analysis of patient costs for rapid SARS-CoV-2 testing in sub-Saharan Africa," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(6), pages 1-12, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0350288
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0350288
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0350288
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0350288&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0350288?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:pone00:0350288. 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: 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.