Investment in HIV/AIDS programs: Does it help strengthen health systems in developing countries?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There is increasing debate about whether the scaled-up investment in HIV/AIDS programs is strengthening or weakening the fragile health systems of many developing countries. This article examines and assesses the evidence and proposes ways forward.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Considerably increased resources have been brought into countries for HIV/AIDS programs by major Global Health Initiatives. Among the positive impacts are the increased awareness of and priority given to public health by governments. In addition, services to people living with HIV/AIDS have rapidly expanded. In many countries infrastructure and laboratories have been strengthened, and in some, primary health care services have been improved. The effect of AIDS on the health work force has been lessened by the provision of antiretroviral treatment to HIV-infected health care workers, by training, and, to an extent, by task-shifting. However, there are reports of concerns, too – among them, a temporal association between increasing AIDS funding and stagnant reproductive health funding, and accusations that scarce personnel are siphoned off from other health care services by offers of better-paying jobs in HIV/AIDS programs. Unfortunately, there is limited hard evidence of these health system impacts.</p> <p>Because service delivery for AIDS has not yet reached a level that could conceivably be considered "as close to Universal Access as possible," countries and development partners must maintain the momentum of investment in HIV/AIDS programs. At the same time, it should be recognized that global action for health is even more underfunded than is the response to the HIV epidemic. The real issue is therefore not whether to fund AIDS or health systems, but how to increase funding for both.</p> <p>Summary</p> <p>The evidence is mixed – mostly positive but some negative – as to the impact on health systems of the scaled-up responses to HIV/AIDS driven primarily by global health partnerships. Current scaled-up responses to HIV/AIDS must be maintained and strengthened. Instead of endless debate about the comparative advantages of vertical and horizontal approaches, partners should focus on the best ways for investments in response to HIV to also broadly strengthen the primary health care systems.</p

Investment in HIV/AIDS programs: Does it help strengthen health systems in developing countries?

Background: There is increasing debate about whether the scaled-up investment in HIV/AIDS programs is strengthening or weakening the fragile health systems of many developing countries. This article examines and assesses the evidence and proposes ways forward. Discussion: Considerably increased resources have been brought into countries for HIV/AIDS programs by major Global Health Initiatives. Among the positive impacts are the increased awareness of and priority given to public health by governments. In addition, services to people living with HIV/AIDS have rapidly expanded. In many countries infrastructure and laboratories have been strengthened, and in some, primary health care services have been improved. The effect of AIDS on the health work force has been lessened by the provision of antiretroviral treatment to HIV-infected health care workers, by training, and, to an extent, by task-shifting. However, there are reports of concerns, too – among them, a temporal association between increasing AIDS funding and stagnant reproductive health funding, and accusations that scarce personnel are siphoned off from other health care services by offers of better-paying jobs in HIV/AIDS programs. Unfortunately, there is limited hard evidence of these health system impacts. Because service delivery for AIDS has not yet reached a level that could conceivably be considered &quot;as close to Universal Access as possible,&quot; countries and development partners must maintain the momentum of investment in HIV/AIDS programs. At the same time, it should be recognized that global action for health is even more underfunded than is the response to the HIV epidemic. The real issue is therefore not whether to fund AIDS or health systems, but how to increase funding for both. Summary: The evidence is mixed – mostly positive but some negative – as to the impact on health systems of the scaled-up responses to HIV/AIDS driven primarily by global health partnerships. Current scaled-up responses to HIV/AIDS must be maintained and strengthened. Instead of endless debate about the comparative advantages of vertical and horizontal approaches, partners should focus on the best ways for investments in response to HIV to also broadly strengthen the primary health care systems

Utilization Patterns and Projected Demand of Antiretroviral Drugs in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

Background. The rapid scale-up of antiretroviral therapy in resource-limited settings has greatly increased demand for antiretroviral medicines and raised the importance of good forward planning, especially in the context of the new 2010 WHO treatment guidelines. Methods. Forecasting of the number of people receiving antiretroviral therapy from 2010 to 2012 was produced using three approaches: linear projection, country-set targets, and a restricted scenario. Two additional scenarios were then used to project the demand for various antiretroviral medicines under a fast and slower phase-out of stavudine. Results. We projected that between 7.1 million and 8.4 million people would be receiving ART by the end of 2012. Of these, 6.6% will be on second-line therapy. High variation in forecast includes reductions in the demand for d4T and d4T increases in the demand for tenofovir, emtricitabine followed by efavirenz, ritonavir, zidovudine and lopinavir; lamivudine, atazanavir, and nevirapine. Conclusion. Despite the global economic crisis and in response to the revised treatment guidelines, our model forecasts an increasing and shifting demand for antiretrovirals in resource-limited settings not only to provide treatment to new patients, but also to those switching to less toxic regimens

Highly active antiretroviral treatment for the prevention of HIV transmission

In 2007 an estimated 33 million people were living with HIV; 67% resided in sub-Saharan Africa, with 35% in eight countries alone. In 2007, there were about 1.4 million HIV-positive tuberculosis cases. Globally, approximately 4 million people had been given highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) by the end of 2008, but in 2007, an estimated 6.7 million were still in need of HAART and 2.7 million more became infected with HIV

Prognostic significance of vascular and valvular calcifications in low- and high-gradient aortic stenosis

International audienceAims In low-gradient aortic stenosis (LGAS), the high valvulo-arterial impedance observed despite low valvular gradient suggests a high vascular load. Thoracic aortic calcifications (TACs) and valvular aortic calcifications (VACs) are, respectively, surrogates of aortic load and aortic valvular gradient. The aim of this study was to compare the respective contributions of TAC and VAC on 3-year cardiovascular (CV) mortality following TAVI in LGAS vs. high-gradient aortic stenosis (HGAS) patients. Methods and results A total of 1396 consecutive patients were included. TAC and VAC were measured on the pre-TAVI CT-scan. About 435 (31.2%) patients had LGAS and 961 (68.8%) HGAS. LGAS patients were more prone to have diabetes, coronary artery disease (CAD), atrial fibrillation (AF), and lower left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), P&lt;0.05 for all. During the 3 years after TAVI, 245(17.8%) patients experienced CV mortality, 92(21.6%) in LGAS and 153(16.2%) in HGAS patients, P=0.018. Multivariate analysis adjusted for age, gender, diabetes, AF, CAD, LVEF, renal function, vascular access, and aortic regurgitation showed that TAC but not VAC was associated with CV mortality in LGAS, hazard ratio (HR) 1.085 confidence interval (CI) (1.019–1.156), P=0.011, and HR 0.713 CI (0.439–1.8), P=0.235; the opposite was observed in HGAS patients with VAC but not TAC being associated with CV mortality, HR 1.342 CI (1.034–1.742), P=0.027, and HR 1.015 CI (0.955–1.079), P=0.626. Conclusion TAC plays a major prognostic role in LGAS while VAC remains the key in HGAS patients. This confirms that LGAS is a complex vascular and valvular disease

Evaluation of Three Sampling Methods to Monitor Outcomes of Antiretroviral Treatment Programmes in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

BACKGROUND: Retention of patients on antiretroviral therapy (ART) over time is a proxy for quality of care and an outcome indicator to monitor ART programs. Using existing databases (Antiretroviral in Lower Income Countries of the International Databases to Evaluate AIDS and Médecins Sans Frontières), we evaluated three sampling approaches to simplify the generation of outcome indicators. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used individual patient data from 27 ART sites and included 27,201 ART-naive adults (≥15 years) who initiated ART in 2005. For each site, we generated two outcome indicators at 12 months, retention on ART and proportion of patients lost to follow-up (LFU), first using all patient data and then within a smaller group of patients selected using three sampling methods (random, systematic and consecutive sampling). For each method and each site, 500 samples were generated, and the average result was compared with the unsampled value. The 95% sampling distribution (SD) was expressed as the 2.5(th) and 97.5(th) percentile values from the 500 samples. Overall, retention on ART was 76.5% (range 58.9-88.6) and the proportion of patients LFU, 13.5% (range 0.8-31.9). Estimates of retention from sampling (n = 5696) were 76.5% (SD 75.4-77.7) for random, 76.5% (75.3-77.5) for systematic and 76.0% (74.1-78.2) for the consecutive method. Estimates for the proportion of patients LFU were 13.5% (12.6-14.5), 13.5% (12.6-14.3) and 14.0% (12.5-15.5), respectively. With consecutive sampling, 50% of sites had SD within ±5% of the unsampled site value. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that random, systematic or consecutive sampling methods are feasible for monitoring ART indicators at national level. However, sampling may not produce precise estimates in some sites

Expanding ART for Treatment and Prevention of HIV in South Africa: Estimated Cost and Cost-Effectiveness 2011-2050

Background: Antiretroviral Treatment (ART) significantly reduces HIV transmission. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of the impact of expanded ART in South Africa. Methods: We model a best case scenario of 90% annual HIV testing coverage in adults 15-49 years old and four ART eligibility scenarios: CD4 count <200 cells/mm3(current practice), CD4 count <350, CD4 count <500, all CD4 levels. 2011-2050 outcomes include deaths, disability adjusted life years (DALYs), HIV infections, cost, and cost per DALY averted. Service and ART costs reflect South African data and international generic prices. ART reduces transmission by 92%. We conducted sensitivity analyses. Results: Expanding ART to CD4 count <350 cells/mm3prevents an estimated 265,000 (17%) and 1.3 million (15%) new HIV infections over 5 and 40 years, respectively. Cumulative deaths decline 15%, from 12.5 to 10.6 million; DALYs by 14% from 109 to 93 million over 40 years. Costs drop $504 million over 5 years and$3.9 billion over 40 years with breakeven by 2013. Compared with the current scenario, expanding to <500 prevents an additional 585,000 and 3 million new HIV infections over 5 and 40 years, respectively. Expanding to all CD4 levels decreases HIV infections by 3.3 million (45%) and costs by $10 billion over 40 years, with breakeven by 2023. By 2050, using higher ART and monitoring costs, all CD4 levels saves$0.6 billion versus current; other ART scenarios cost $9-194 per DALY averted. If ART reduces transmission by 99$17.5 billion. Sensitivity analyses suggest that poor retention and predominant acute phase transmission reduce DALYs averted by 26% and savings by 7%. Conclusion: Increasing the provision of ART to <350 cells/mm3 may significantly reduce costs while reducing the HIV burden. Feasibility including HIV testing and ART uptake, retention, and adherence should be evaluated