Cost-Effectiveness of Malaria Chemoprophylaxis for Travelers
Author Information
Author(s): Massad Eduardo, Behrens Ben C, Coutinho Francisco AB, Behrens Ronald H
Primary Institution: School of Medicine, University of São Paulo
Hypothesis
Is the current malaria chemoprophylactic policy for travelers cost-effective when adjusted for endemic transmission risk and duration of exposure?
Conclusion
Chemoprophylaxis is not cost-effective for travelers to Thailand or the Amazon region of Brazil, but is cost-effective for travel to West Africa and for those staying longer than 45 days in India and Indonesia.
Supporting Evidence
- The threshold incidence for cost-effective chemoprophylaxis is 1.13%.
- Travelers to Brazil and Thailand never achieve the minimal threshold for cost-effectiveness.
- The analysis incorporates both direct and indirect costs of using malaria prophylaxis.
Takeaway
This study looks at whether taking malaria prevention medicine is worth the money for travelers, and finds it's not always a good idea depending on where you go and how long you stay.
Methodology
A three-component model combining probability, cost, and malaria risk components was used to estimate health costs avoided through chemoprophylaxis and costs of disease prevention.
Potential Biases
The malaria probability may be subject to reporting bias and does not account for chemoprophylaxis usage or the number of truly exposed travelers.
Limitations
The model does not include intangible costs like pain and suffering and relies on the accuracy of malaria incidence data.
Participant Demographics
UK travelers to malaria endemic regions.
Statistical Information
Confidence Interval
95% C.I.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website