Biomedical subjects

A P Johnson-Masotti

Publications and source records attributed to A P Johnson-Masotti.

8 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2001

Using cost-effectiveness league tables to compare interventions to prevent sexual transmission of HIV.

Cost-effectiveness information is needed to help public health decision makers choose between competing HIV prevention programs. One way to organize this information is in a 'league table' that lists cost-effectiveness ratios for different interventions and which facilitates comparisons across interventions. Herein we propose a common outcome measure for use in HIV prevention league tables and present a preliminary league table of interventions to reduce sexual transmission of HIV in the US. Fifteen studies encompassing 29 intervention for different population groups are included in the table. Approximately half of the interventions are cost-saving (i.e. save society money, in the long run), and three-quarters are cost-effective by conventional standards. We discuss the utility of such a table for informing the HIV prevention resource allocation process and delineate some of the difficulties associated with the league table approach, especially as applied to HIV prevention cost-effectiveness analysis.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗

PubMed2001

Cost-effectiveness of an HIV prevention intervention for mentally ill adults.

Adults with severe mental illness are at high risk for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and transmission. Small-group interventions that focus on sexual communication, condom use skills, and motivation to practice safer sex have been shown to be effective at helping mentally ill persons reduce their risk for HIV. However, the cost-effectiveness of these interventions has not been established. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of a 9-session small-group intervention for women with mental illness recruited from community mental health clinics in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. We used standard techniques of cost-utility analysis to determine the cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) saved by the intervention. This analysis indicated that the intervention cost $679 per person, and over $136,000 per QALY saved. When the analysis was restricted to the subset of women who reported having engaged in vaginal or anal intercourse in the 3 months prior to the baseline assessment, the cost per QALY saved dropped to approximately $71,000. These estimates suggest that this intervention is marginally cost-effective in comparison with other health promotion interventions, especially if high-risk, sexual-active women are preferentially recruited.

Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome↗

PubMed2001

Probabilistic cost-effectiveness analysis of HIV prevention. Comparing a Bayesian approach with traditional deterministic sensitivity analysis.

In cost-effectiveness analysis, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio is used to measure economic efficiency of a new intervention, relative to an existing one. However, costs and effects are seldom known with certainty. Uncertainty arises from two main sources: uncertainty regarding correct values of intervention-related parameters and uncertainty associated with sampling variation. Recently, attention has focused on Bayesian techniques for quantifying uncertainty. We computed the Bayesian-based 95% credible interval estimates of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of several related HIV prevention interventions and compared these results with univariate sensitivity analyses. The conclusions were comparable, even though the probabilistic technique provided additional information.

Bayes Theorem↗

PubMed2000

Cost-threshold analyses of the National AIDS Demonstration Research HIV prevention interventions.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of the multisite National AIDS Demonstration Research (NADR) program was to reduce the sexual and drug injection-related HIV risks of out-of-treatment injection drug users and their sex partners. Previous analyses have established that the NADR interventions were effective at changing participants' risky behaviors. This study was to determine whether the NADR program also was cost-effective. METHODS: Data from eight NADR study sites were included in the analysis. A mathematical model was used to translate reported sexual and injection-related behavior changes into an estimate of the number of infections prevented by the NADR interventions and then to calculate the corresponding savings in averted HIV/AIDS medical care costs and quality-adjusted years of life, assuming United States values for these parameters. Because cost data were not collected in the original NADR evaluation, the savings in averted medical care costs were compared with the cost of implementing a similar intervention program for injection drug users. RESULTS: The eight NADR interventions prevented approximately 129 infections among 6629 participants and their partners. Overall, the NADR program would be cost saving (i.e. provide net economic savings) if it cost less than US$2107 per person and would be cost-effective if it cost less than US$10,264 per person. Both of these estimates are considerably larger than the US$273 per person cost of the comparison intervention. There was substantial cross-site variability. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this analysis strongly suggest that the NADR interventions were cost-saving overall and were, at the very least, cost-effective at all eight sites. In the United States and other developed counties, investments in HIV-prevention interventions such as these have the potential to save substantial economic resources by averting HIV-related medical care expenses among injection drug users.

Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome↗

PubMed2000

Decision-making in HIV prevention community planning: an integrative review.

Since 1994, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has required that the 65 health department grantees that receive funding for HIV prevention interventions engage in a community planning process to involve affected communities in local prevention decision making; to increase the use of epidemiological data to target HIV prevention resources; and to ensure that the planning process takes into account scientific information on the effectiveness and efficiency of different HIV interventions. Local community planning groups are charged with identifying and prioritizing unmet HIV prevention needs in their communities, as well as prioritizing prevention interventions designed to address these needs. Their recommendations, in turn, form the basis for the local health department's request for HIV prevention funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Given the community planning process's central role in the allocation of federal HIV prevention funds, it is critical that sound decision-making procedures inform this process. In this article, we review the basics of the community planning prioritization process and summarize the decision-making experiences of community planning groups across the US. We then describe several priority-setting tools and decision analytic models that have been developed to assist in HIV community planning prioritization and discuss their strengths and weaknesses. Finally, we offer suggestions for improving the decision-analytic basis for HIV prevention community planning.

Community Health Planning↗

PubMed2000

Cost-effectiveness of an HIV risk reduction intervention for adults with severe mental illness.

Small-group HIV prevention interventions that focus on individual behavioural change have been shown to be especially effective in reducing HIV risk among persons with severe mental illness. Because economic resources to fund HIV prevention efforts are limited, health departments, community planning groups and other key decision-makers need reliable information on the cost and cost-effectiveness (not solely on effectiveness) of different HIV prevention interventions. This study used an economic evaluation technique known as cost-utility analysis to assess the cost-effectiveness of three related cognitive-behavioural HIV risk reduction interventions: a single-session, one-on-one intervention; a multi-session small-group intervention; and a multi-session small-group intervention that taught participants to act as safer sex advocates to their peers. For men, all three interventions were cost-effective, but advocacy training was the most cost-effective of the three. For women, only the single-session intervention was cost-effective. The gender differences observed here highlight the importance of focusing on gender issues when delivering HIV prevention interventions to men and women who are severely mentally ill.

Adult↗

PubMed2000

Prioritization methods for HIV community planning.

Since 1994, community planning groups (CPGs) have played an important role in shaping local HIV prevention efforts. The community planning process requires CPGs to prioritize HIV prevention interventions and unmet needs among at-risk populations. This article describes and compares four prioritization methods: (1) the ranking method, (2) Holtgrave's method, (3) Kaplan's method, and (4) a novel utility-based prioritization method. These methods are compared in terms of effectiveness, efficiency, equity, and political feasibility. The methods described here are meant to assist CPGs in the difficult prioritization task by helping CPG members organize their thoughts in the prioritization process.

Algorithms↗

PubMed2000

Secondary HIV transmission rates in a mixed-gender sample.

Information about the sexual behaviour of HIV-infected individuals is needed to predict the course of the sexually transmitted HIV epidemic in the US. The present study provides model-based estimates of the secondary transmission rate (i.e. the number of infections expected among the sex partners of already infected individuals) for a sample of HIV-positive persons in Atlanta. A mathematical model was used to estimate the secondary transmission rate of HIV infection for a sample of HIV-positive men and women in Atlanta, based on their self-reported sexual behaviour, extrapolated over a 15-year horizon. Separate rates were calculated for different transmission routes, including: from women to men-who-have-sex-with women (MSW) and from men-who-have-sex-with-men (MSM) to other MSM. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the impact of different parametric and modelling assumptions. Restricted to the sub-sample that reported transmission risk behaviours, the mean number of secondary infections was 0.14 for transmission from women to MSW; 0.31 for transmission from MSW to women; and 0.84 for MSM to MSM transmission. Bisexual men were at especially high transmission risk, with 1.59 and 0.54 secondary infections expected among their male and female partners, respectively. The main analysis indicates that, in this sample, each current infection will lead to fewer than one future infection for all groups other than bisexual men, which suggests that the epidemic is contracting in this community, although this analysis cannot rule out the possibility of a growing epidemic among MSM. This method can be used to identify groups at high risk for HIV transmission and thereby to better target HIV prevention resources.

Dangerous Behavior↗