Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorAssebe, Lelisa Fekadu
dc.contributor.authorJiang Kwete, Xiaoxiao
dc.contributor.authorWang, Dan
dc.contributor.authorLiu, Lingrui
dc.contributor.authorNorheim, Ole Frithjof
dc.contributor.authorJbaily, Abdulrahman
dc.contributor.authorVerguet, Stéphane
dc.contributor.authorJohansson, Kjell Arne
dc.contributor.authorTolla, Mieraf Taddesse
dc.date.accessioned2021-04-19T11:18:46Z
dc.date.available2021-04-19T11:18:46Z
dc.date.created2021-02-05T11:12:42Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.issn1475-2875
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/2738360
dc.description.abstractBackground Malaria is a public health burden and a major cause for morbidity and mortality in Ethiopia. Malaria also places a substantial financial burden on families and Ethiopia’s national economy. Economic evaluations, with evidence on equity and financial risk protection (FRP), are therefore essential to support decision-making for policymakers to identify best buys amongst possible malaria interventions. The aim of this study is to estimate the expected health and FRP benefits of universal public financing of key malaria interventions in Ethiopia. Methods Using extended cost-effectiveness analysis (ECEA), the potential health and FRP benefits were estimated, and their distributions across socio-economic groups, of publicly financing a 10% coverage increase in artemisinin-based combination therapy (ACT), long-lasting insecticide-treated bed nets (LLIN), indoor residual spraying (IRS), and malaria vaccine (hypothetical). Results ACT, LLIN, IRS, and vaccine would avert 358, 188, 107 and 38 deaths, respectively, each year at a net government cost of USD 5.7, 16.5, 32.6, and 5.1 million, respectively. The annual cost of implementing IRS would be two times higher than that of the LLIN interventions, and would be the main driver of the total costs. The averted deaths would be mainly concentrated in the poorest two income quintiles. The four interventions would eliminate about USD 4,627,800 of private health expenditures, and the poorest income quintiles would see the greatest FRP benefits. ACT and LLINs would have the largest impact on malaria-related deaths averted and FRP benefits. Conclusions ACT, LLIN, IRS, and vaccine interventions would bring large health and financial benefits to the poorest households in Ethiopia.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherBMCen_US
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleHealth gains and financial risk protection afforded by public financing of selected malaria interventions in Ethiopia: an extended cost-effectiveness analysisen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
dc.rights.holderCopyright 2020 The Authorsen_US
dc.source.articlenumber41en_US
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12936-020-3103-5
dc.identifier.cristin1887059
dc.source.journalMalaria Journalen_US
dc.relation.projectBill & Melinda Gates Foundation: OPP1162384en_US
dc.identifier.citationMalaria Journal. 2020, 19, 41en_US
dc.source.volume19en_US


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal