4.1 Article

Health economics of blood transfusion safety - focus on sub-Saharan Africa

Journal

BIOLOGICALS
Volume 38, Issue 1, Pages 53-58

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biologicals.2009.10.006

Keywords

Health economics; HIV; HCV; HBV; Transfusion; Cost-effectiveness; Screening; Developing countries

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and objectives. Health economics provides a standardised methodology for valid comparisons of interventions in different fields of health care. This review discusses the health economic evaluations of strategies to enhance blood product safety in sub-Saharan Africa Methods. We reviewed health economic methodology with special reference to cost-effectiveness analysis We searched the literature for cost-effectiveness in blood product safety in sub-Saharan Africa. Result HIV-antibody screening in different settings in sub-Saharan Africa showed health gains and saved costs Except for adding HIV-p24 screening, adding other tests such as nucleic acid amplification testing (NAT) to HIV-antibody screening displayed incremental cost-effectiveness ratios greater than the WHO/World Bank specified threshold for cost-effectiveness. The addition of HIV-p24 in combination with HCV antibody/antigen screening and multiplex (HBV, HCV and HIV) NAT in pools of 24 may also be cost-effective options for Ghana Conclusions From a health economic viewpoint. HIV-antibody screening should always be implemented in sub-Saharan Africa. The addition of HIV-p24 antigen screening, in combination with HCV antibody/antigen screening and multiplex (HBV. HCV and HIV) NAT in pools of 24 may be feasible options for Ghana. Suggestions for future health economic evaluations of blood transfusion safety interventions in sub-Saharan Africa are mis-transfusion, laboratory quality and donor management.(C) 2009 The International Association for Biologicals Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available