OBJECTIVE: To estimate the incremental societal costs and effectiveness of a second human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) antibody test during the third trimester of pregnancy compared with no second test. METHODS: We used a decision tree in this cost-effectiveness analysis to model outcomes among pregnant women in high-risk communities and nationwide who received an initial, negative HIV antibody test during the first trimester. The main outcome measure was discounted costs per year of infant life saved. RESULTS: In high-risk communities with estimated HIV incidence of 6.2 per 1000 person-years, a second HIV test compared with no second test would detect 192 infections in women, prevent approximately 37 infant infections, and save 655 infant life-years per 100,000 women tested. Net savings would be 5.2 million US dollars. Applied to an estimated national incidence of.17 per 1000 person-years, a second test would detect 5.3 infections in women, prevent 1.3 infant infections, and save 23.3 infant life-years per 100,000 women tested. Net costs would be 1.06 million US dollars, or 45,708 US dollars for each year of infant life saved. A second test would result in net savings in populations with HIV incidence of 1.2 per 1000 person-years or higher. CONCLUSION: Health care providers serving women in communities with an HIV incidence of 1 per 1000 person-years or higher should strongly consider implementing a second voluntary universal HIV test during the third trimester. Providers serving lower-risk communities should pilot second testing to assess community-specific costs.
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the incremental societal costs and effectiveness of a second human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) antibody test during the third trimester of pregnancy compared with no second test. METHODS: We used a decision tree in this cost-effectiveness analysis to model outcomes among pregnant women in high-risk communities and nationwide who received an initial, negative HIV antibody test during the first trimester. The main outcome measure was discounted costs per year of infant life saved. RESULTS: In high-risk communities with estimated HIV incidence of 6.2 per 1000 person-years, a second HIV test compared with no second test would detect 192 infections in women, prevent approximately 37 infantinfections, and save 655 infant life-years per 100,000 women tested. Net savings would be 5.2 million US dollars. Applied to an estimated national incidence of.17 per 1000 person-years, a second test would detect 5.3 infections in women, prevent 1.3 infantinfections, and save 23.3 infant life-years per 100,000 women tested. Net costs would be 1.06 million US dollars, or 45,708 US dollars for each year of infant life saved. A second test would result in net savings in populations with HIV incidence of 1.2 per 1000 person-years or higher. CONCLUSION: Health care providers serving women in communities with an HIV incidence of 1 per 1000 person-years or higher should strongly consider implementing a second voluntary universal HIV test during the third trimester. Providers serving lower-risk communities should pilot second testing to assess community-specific costs.
Authors: John Kinuthia; Alison L Drake; Daniel Matemo; Barbra A Richardson; Clement Zeh; Lusi Osborn; Julie Overbaugh; R Scott McClelland; Grace John-Stewart Journal: AIDS Date: 2015-09-24 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: John Kinuthia; James N Kiarie; Carey Farquhar; Barbra Richardson; Ruth Nduati; Dorothy Mbori-Ngacha; Grace John-Stewart Journal: Curr HIV Res Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 1.581
Authors: Mayris P Webber; Penelope Demas; Nancy Blaney; Mardge H Cohen; Rosalind Carter; Margaret Lampe; Denise Jamieson; Robert Maupin; Steven Nesheim; Marc Bulterys Journal: Matern Child Health J Date: 2007-10-30
Authors: Dayu Lu; Juan Liu; Lindy Samson; Ari Bitnun; Sandra Seigel; Jason Brophy; Lynne Leonard; Robert S Remis Journal: Can J Public Health Date: 2014-01-06
Authors: Robert S Remis; Maraki Fikre Merid; Robert W H Palmer; Elaine Whittingham; Susan M King; Natasha S Danson; Lee Vernich; Carol Swantee; Carol Major Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-11-09 Impact factor: 3.240