Person:

Resch, Stephen

Background: As part of efforts to reduce maternal deaths in Nigeria, pregnant women are being encouraged to give birth in healthcare facilities. However, little is known about whether or not available healthcare facilities can cope with an increasing demand for obstetric care. We thus carried out this survey as a rapid and tactical assessment of facility quality. We visited 121 healthcare facilities, and used the opportunity to interview over 700 women seeking care at these facilities. Findings Most of the primary healthcare facilities we visited were unable to provide all basic Emergency Obstetric Care (bEmOC) services. In general, they lack clinical staff needed to dispense maternal and neonatal care services, ambulances and uninterrupted electricity supply whenever there were obstetric emergencies. Secondary healthcare facilities fared better, but, like their primary counterparts, lack neonatal care infrastructure. Among patients, most lived within 30 minutes of the visited facilities and still reported some difficulty getting there. Of those who had had two or more childbirths, the conditional probability of a delivery occurring in a healthcare facility was 0.91 if the previous delivery occurred in a healthcare facility, and 0.24 if it occurred at home. The crude risk of an adverse neonatal outcome did not significantly vary by delivery site or birth attendant, and the occurrence of such an outcome during an in-facility delivery may influence the mother to have her next delivery outside. Such an outcome during a home delivery may not prompt a subsequent in-facility delivery. Conclusions: In conclusion, reducing maternal deaths in Nigeria will require attention to both increasing the number of facilities with high-quality EmOC capability and also assuring Nigerian women have access to these facilities regardless of where they live.

Background: Cervical cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer death in women, with 85% of cases and deaths occurring in developing countries. While organized screening programs have reduced cervical cancer incidence in high-income countries through detection and treatment of precancerous lesions, the implementation of organized screening has not been effective in low-resource settings due to lack of infrastructure and limited budgets. Our objective was to estimate the cost of comprehensive primary and secondary cervical cancer prevention in low- and middle-income countries. Methods and Findings: We performed a modeling analysis to estimate 1) for girls aged 10 years, the cost of 2-dose human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination; and 2) for women aged 30 to 49 years, the cost of cervical cancer screening (with visual inspection with acetic acid (VIA), HPV testing, or cytology) and preventive treatment in 102 low- and middle-income countries from 2015 to 2024. We used an Excel-based costing and service utilization model to estimate financial costs (2013 US$) based on prevalence of HPV, prevalence of precancerous lesions, and screening test performance. Where epidemiologic data were unavailable, we extrapolated from settings with data using an individual-based microsimulation model of cervical carcinogenesis (calibrated to 20 settings) and multivariate regression. Total HPV vaccination costs ranged from US$8.6 billion to US$24.2 billion for all scenarios considered (immediate, 5-year, or 10-year roll-out; price per dose US$4.55-US$70 by country income level). The total cost of screening and preventive treatment ranged from US$5.1 billion (10-year roll-out, screening once at age 35 years) to US$42.3 billion (immediate roll-out, high intensity screening). Limitations of this analysis include the assumption of standardized protocols by country income level that did not account for the potential presence of multiple screening modalities or management strategies within a country, and extrapolation of cost and epidemiologic data to settings where data were limited. Conclusions: The estimated cost of comprehensive cervical cancer prevention with 2-dose HPV vaccination of 10-year-old girls and screening of women aged 30 to 49 years ranges from US$13.7 billion to US$66.5 billion, depending on speed of roll-out, vaccine price per dose, and screening test and frequency. Findings demonstrate the substantial impact of vaccine price in middle-income countries that are not eligible for assistance from Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. Replacing routine cytology with HPV-based screening may reduce total costs. Data on the health impact and relative cost-effectiveness of strategies are needed to determine the best value for public health dollars.

Background: The introduction of a conjugate vaccine for serogroup A Neisseria meningitidis has dramatically reduced disease in the African meningitis belt. In this context, important questions remain about the performance of different vaccine policies that target remaining serogroups. Here, we estimate the health impact and cost associated with several alternative vaccination policies in Burkina Faso. Methods and findings We developed and calibrated a mathematical model of meningococcal transmission to project the disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted and costs associated with the current Base policy (serogroup A conjugate vaccination at 9 months, as part of the Expanded Program on Immunization [EPI], plus district-specific reactive vaccination campaigns using polyvalent meningococcal polysaccharide [PMP] vaccine in response to outbreaks) and three alternative policies: (1) Base Prime: novel polyvalent meningococcal conjugate (PMC) vaccine replaces the serogroup A conjugate in EPI and is also used in reactive campaigns; (2) Prevention 1: PMC used in EPI and in a nationwide catch-up campaign for 1–18-year-olds; and (3) Prevention 2: Prevention 1, except the nationwide campaign includes individuals up to 29 years old. Over a 30-year simulation period, Prevention 2 would avert 78% of the meningococcal cases (95% prediction interval: 63%–90%) expected under the Base policy if serogroup A is not replaced by remaining serogroups after elimination, and would avert 87% (77%–93%) of meningococcal cases if complete strain replacement occurs. Compared to the Base policy and at the PMC vaccine price of US$4 per dose, strategies that use PMC vaccine (i.e., Base Prime and Preventions 1 and 2) are expected to be cost saving if strain replacement occurs, and would cost US$51 (−US$236, US$490), US$188 (−US$97, US$626), and US$246 (−US$53, US$703) per DALY averted, respectively, if strain replacement does not occur. An important potential limitation of our study is the simplifying assumption that all circulating meningococcal serogroups can be aggregated into a single group; while this assumption is critical for model tractability, it would compromise the insights derived from our model if the effectiveness of the vaccine differs markedly between serogroups or if there are complex between-serogroup interactions that influence the frequency and magnitude of future meningitis epidemics. Conclusions: Our results suggest that a vaccination strategy that includes a catch-up nationwide immunization campaign in young adults with a PMC vaccine and the addition of this new vaccine into EPI is cost-effective and would avert a substantial portion of meningococcal cases expected under the current World Health Organization–recommended strategy of reactive vaccination. This analysis is limited to Burkina Faso and assumes that polyvalent vaccines offer equal protection against all meningococcal serogroups; further studies are needed to evaluate the robustness of this assumption and applicability for other countries in the meningitis belt.