Using cost-effectiveness analysis to evaluate targeting strategies: The case of vitamin A supplementation
Using cost-effectiveness analysis to evaluate targeting strategies: The case of vitamin A supplementation
复制标题
DOI:
10.1093/heapol/12.1.29
复制
发表时间:
1997-03-01
影响因子:
3.2
通讯作者:
Costales, MO
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
Loevinsohn, BP;Sutter, RW;Costales, MO
Given the demonstrated efficacy of vitamin A supplements in reducing childhoood mortality, health officials now have to decide whether ii: would be efficient to target the supplements to high risk children. Decisions about targeting are complex because they depend on a number of factors; the degree of clustering of preventable deaths, the cost of the intervention, the side-effects of the intervention, the cost of identifying the high risk group, and the accuracy of the 'diagnosis' of risk.A cost-effectiveness analysis was used in the Philippines to examine whether vitamin A supplements should be given universally to all children 6-59 months, targeted broadly to children suffering from mild, moderate, or severe malnutrition, or targeted narrowly to pre-schoolers with moderate and severe malnutrition. The first year average cost of the universal approach was US$67.21 per death averted compared to $144.12 and $257.20 for the broad and narrow targeting approaches respectively. When subjected to sensitivity analysis the conclusion about the most cost-effective strategy was robust to changes in underlying assumptions such as the efficacy of supplements, clustering of deaths, and toxicity.Targeting vitamin A supplements to high risk children is not an efficient use of resources. Based on the results of this cost-effectiveness analysis and a consideration of alternate strategies, it is apparent that vitamin A, like immunization, should be provided to all pre-schoolers in the developing world. Issues about targeting public health interventions can usefully be addressed by cost-effectiveness analysis.