Is malaria control a priority? Evidence from Nepal.
The research reported here assessed the value of malaria control through a cost-effectiveness study of the vertically-organized malaria control programme in Nepal. It presents a methodological framework for analysing cost-effectiveness which includes resource-saving consequences as well as health consequences. The methods used to collect data on control costs, cases and deaths prevented, treatment costs averted and production gains are described and the assumptions required by the analysis are made explicit. A variety of cost-effectiveness ratios are calculated, sensitivity analysis applied and the policy implications of the results considered. The results from Nepal are compared to estimates for parasitic disease and other health programmes in other countries: it is concluded that the Nepalese programme appears no less cost-effective than many other health interventions. It can also be justified by reference to the population groups benefiting from malaria control.
Mills
A
A
Health Policy Unit, London School of Hygiene.
D000041:Absenteeism; D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D002423:Cause of Death; D002648:Child; D002675:Child, Preschool; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D003906:Developing Countries; D005260:Female; D006292:Health Priorities / Q000191:economics*; D006801:Humans; D007223:Infant; D008288:Malaria / Q000191:economics / Q000401:mortality / Q000517:prevention & control*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009032:Mosquito Control / Q000191:economics*; D009390:Nepal; D011788:Quality of Life; D026712:Value of Life