Employing Demand-Based Volumetric Forecasting to Identify Potential for and Roles of Devices in Scale-Up of Medical Male Circumcision in Zambia and Zimbabwe

Introduction: Devices for male circumcision (MC) are becoming available in 14 priority countries where MC is being implemented for HIV prevention. Understanding potential impact on demand for services is one important programmatic consideration because countries determine whether to scale up devices within MC programs. Methods: A population-based survey measuring willingness to undergo MC, assuming availability of surgical MC and 3 devices, was conducted among 1250 uncircumcised men, ages 10–49 years in Zambia and 1000 uncircumcised men, ages 13–49 years in Zimbabwe. Simulated Test Market methodology was used to estimate incremental MC demand and the extent to which devices might be preferred over surgery, assuming availability of: surgical MC in both countries; the devices PrePex, ShangRing, and Unicirc in Zambia; and PrePex in Zimbabwe. Results: Modeled estimates indicate PrePex has the potential to provide an overall increase in MC demand ranging from an estimated 13%–50%, depending on country and WHO prequalification ages, replacing 11%–41% of surgical procedures. In Zambia, ShangRing could provide 8% overall increase, replacing 45% of surgical procedures, and Unicirc could provide 30% overall increase, replacing 85% of surgical procedures. Conclusions: In both countries, devices have potential to increase overall demand for MC, assuming wide scale awareness and availability of circumcision by the devices. With consideration for age and country, PrePex may provide the greatest potential increase in demand, followed by Unicirc (measured in Zambia only) and ShangRing (also Zambia only). These results inform one program dimension for decision making on potential device introduction strategies; however, they must be considered within the broader programmatic context

Cost-effectiveness of voluntary medical male circumcision for HIV prevention across sub-Saharan Africa : results from five independent models

BACKGROUND: Voluntary medical male circumcision (VMMC) has been a recommended HIV prevention strategy in sub-Saharan Africa since 2007, particularly in countries with high HIV prevalence. However, given the scale-up of antiretroviral therapy programmes, it is not clear whether VMMC still represents a cost-effective use of scarce HIV programme resources. METHODS: Using five existing well described HIV mathematical models, we compared continuation of VMMC for 5 years in men aged 15 years and older to no further VMMC in South Africa, Malawi, and Zimbabwe and across a range of setting scenarios in sub-Saharan Africa. Outputs were based on a 50-year time horizon, VMMC cost was assumed to be US$90, and a cost-effectiveness threshold of US$500 was used. FINDINGS: In South Africa and Malawi, the continuation of VMMC for 5 years resulted in cost savings and health benefits (infections and disability-adjusted life-years averted) according to all models. Of the two models modelling Zimbabwe, the continuation of VMMC for 5 years resulted in cost savings and health benefits by one model but was not as cost-effective according to the other model. Continuation of VMMC was cost-effective in 68% of setting scenarios across sub-Saharan Africa. VMMC was more likely to be cost-effective in modelled settings with higher HIV incidence; VMMC was cost-effective in 62% of settings with HIV incidence of less than 0·1 per 100 person-years in men aged 15-49 years, increasing to 95% with HIV incidence greater than 1·0 per 100 person-years. INTERPRETATION: VMMC remains a cost-effective, often cost-saving, prevention intervention in sub-Saharan Africa for at least the next 5 years. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation for the HIV Modelling Consortium

The future of HIV testing in eastern and southern Africa: Broader scope, targeted services.

In this Policy Forum, Anna Grimsrud and colleagues discuss the future of HIV testing in eastern and southern Africa, using insights gleaned from a 2021 expert consultation

Multi-Country analysis of treatment costs for HIV/AIDS (match): facility-level art unit cost analysis in Ethiopia, Malawi, Rwanda, South Africa and Zambia

Background: Today's uncertain HIV funding landscape threatens to slow progress towards treatment goals. Understanding the costs of antiretroviral therapy (ART) will be essential for governments to make informed policy decisions about the pace of scale-up under the 2013 WHO HIV Treatment Guidelines, which increase the number of people eligible for treatment from 17.6 million to 28.6 million. The study presented here is one of the largest of its kind and the first to describe the facility-level cost of ART in a random sample of facilities in Ethiopia, Malawi, Rwanda, South Africa and Zambia.Methods and Findings: In 2010-2011, comprehensive data on one year of facility-level ART costs and patient outcomes were collected from 161 facilities, selected using stratified random sampling. Overall, facility-level ART costs were significantly lower than expected in four of the five countries, with a simple average of $208 per patient-year (ppy) across Ethiopia, Malawi, Rwanda and Zambia. Costs were higher in South Africa, at$682 ppy. This included medications, laboratory services, direct and indirect personnel, patient support, equipment and administrative services. Facilities demonstrated the ability to retain patients alive and on treatment at these costs, although outcomes for established patients (2-8% annual loss to follow-up or death) were better than outcomes for new patients in their first year of ART (77-95% alive and on treatment).Conclusions: This study illustrated that the facility-level costs of ART are lower than previously understood in these five countries. While limitations must be considered, and costs will vary across countries, this suggests that expanded treatment coverage may be affordable. Further research is needed to understand investment costs of treatment scale-up, non-facility costs and opportunities for more efficient resource allocation

Cost of Treatment per Patient-Year by Country (USD).

a<p>Simple mean calculated across facilities in the sample.</p>b<p>Weighted mean is weighted by patient-years by facility.</p>c<p>Direct and indirect personnel are included.</p>d<p>With the exception of South Africa, lab costs include consumables and reagents only. Lab costs in South Africa are fully-loaded, including both personnel and equipment.</p><p>Cost of Treatment per Patient-Year by Country (USD).</p

Number of Patients in the Sample by CD4 Category (cells/mm³).

<p>Number of Patients in the Sample by CD4 Category (cells/mm³).</p

Attrition and Retention Rates by Country.

a<p>Eligible charts excluded patients that were transferred to another facility.</p>b<p>Note some sites had not been providing ART for as long and did not have patients that fit the requirements for an established patient.</p><p>Attrition and Retention Rates by Country.</p

Regimen Selection and Average First Line ARV Costs by Country.

<p>Regimen breakdowns are from the cost data year, and do not reflect changes in regimen selection that countries have made since 2009–2011, such as the continued phase-out of d4T.</p