1 / 15

Steve Hodgins MCHIP/ JSI (presenting), Amada Pomeroy MCHIP/ JSI, Hiwot Belay MCHIP/ JSI,

Pre-Eclampsia/ Eclampsia Interventions and their Cost Effectiveness Interventions for Impact in Essential Obstetric and Newborn Care Africa Regional Meeting, 21–25 February 2011. Steve Hodgins MCHIP/ JSI (presenting), Amada Pomeroy MCHIP/ JSI, Hiwot Belay MCHIP/ JSI, Marge Koblinsky MCHIP/ JSI.

malachi-hubbard
Download Presentation

Steve Hodgins MCHIP/ JSI (presenting), Amada Pomeroy MCHIP/ JSI, Hiwot Belay MCHIP/ JSI,

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Pre-Eclampsia/ Eclampsia Interventions and their Cost EffectivenessInterventions for Impact in Essential Obstetric and Newborn CareAfrica Regional Meeting, 21–25 February 2011 Steve Hodgins MCHIP/ JSI (presenting), Amada Pomeroy MCHIP/ JSI, Hiwot Belay MCHIP/ JSI, Marge Koblinsky MCHIP/ JSI

  2. Planning and Prioritizing • In making decisions about supporting new initiatives, we select among options based on relative: • disease burden, • effectiveness of the proposed intervention(s), • feasibility and cost. • PE/E accounts for ~19% of maternal deaths in Africa • MgSO4 for treatment and calcium and ASA for prevention are known to be effective • For all 3 of these, the first two conditions are met • What about feasibility and cost?

  3. Feasibility • Feasibility – could we do this effectively in our setting? • Challenges for service providers, for the system • Cost – scalability, sustainability • Available service delivery platforms: ANC, HF deliveries, community-based distribution • MgSO4 issues • Antenatal ASA and calcium issues

  4. Interventions considered in our modeling • For pre-eclampsia/ eclampsia: • Prevention • antenatal calcium from 20 weeks • aspirin from 15 weeks • Treatment: MgSO4 loading dose • For comparison, we include: • Antenatal iron-folate from 20 weeks • Routine oxytocin during the 3rd stage, to prevent post-partum hemorrhage

  5. Intervention Efficacy • We don’t have as much evidence as we would like: difficulties for preventive intervention effects on maternal mortality. • Studies with huge samples are required to show mortality effects with adequate statistical power. • For established interventions, often it is considered unethical to do a RCT, as they would entail withholding such interventions. • In some cases, we have only proxy endpoints, e.g. serious morbidity, from which we infer comparable mortality effects, e.g. severe PE or severe PPH.

  6. Mortality Reduction Efficacy

  7. Effectiveness • As a common yardstick comparing preventive & treatment interventions, we are using averted maternal and neonatal deaths per 100,000 pregnancies/ deliveries reached • Depending on evidence available, we use efficacy in reducing cause-specific mortality or overall maternal or neonatal mortality

  8. Measuring Effectiveness • To model mortality reduction efficacy for calcium we multiply • MMR x %PE/E x documented efficacy. • So, in a country with an MMR of 500, • the number of averted deaths/ 100,000 reached = • 500 x 19% x .20 = 19 deaths

  9. Measuring Effectiveness • In the following 2 tables, we assume: • MMR = 500 • NNMR = 30 • PPH % of MMR = 34%* • PE/E % of MMR = 19%* • Prematurity % of NNMR = 29%* • * from Countdown Coverage 2010 report

  10. Averted deaths/ 100,000 reached

  11. Costs • Full costs vs. marginal costs; costs for whom • Up-front costs: training, infrastructure, equipment • Recurrent costs • Commodity-related: procurement, storage, transport, wastage • Supervision, maintenance and repair, some ongoing training • For interventions considered in this exercise, relatively modest up-front and non-commodity costs.

  12. Costs in this Modeling Exercise • For simplicity in comparing across interventions, cost assessment for this presentation has been restricted to commodity-related, reckoned /100,000 reached • Quantification: • Universal preventive vs. case-management for complications • Volume/ quantity required per patient/ beneficiary • Unit costs – costs per pill/ vial; from MSH price guide http://erc.msh.org/mainpage.cfm?file=1.0.htm&module=Dmp&language=English

  13. Measuring Costs

  14. Conclusions & Next Steps • In deciding on new initiatives, consider: disease burden, effectiveness of interventions, feasibility, cost • We are finalizing a more complete analysis which we expect to make available shortly; this is intended as an aid to decision makers, particularly in ministries of health and among partner agencies

  15. For further information, you can contact me at: shodgins@mchip.net wwww.mchip.net Follow us on:

More Related