Cost-Effectiveness of HIV Screening in Different Settings
Author Information
Author(s): Prabhu Vimalanand S., Farnham Paul G., Hutchinson Angela B., Soorapanth Sada, Heffelfinger James D., Golden Matthew R., Brooks John T., Rimland David, Sansom Stephanie L.
Primary Institution: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
Hypothesis
Is HIV screening in STD clinics and emergency departments more cost-effective than inpatient diagnosis?
Conclusion
HIV screening in settings with less-advanced disease stages is cost-effective and can reduce transmission.
Supporting Evidence
- Screening in STD clinics and emergency departments was found to be cost-effective compared to inpatient diagnosis.
- Initiating treatment with HAART at higher CD4 counts leads to better health outcomes.
- Early diagnosis reduces the number of secondary HIV transmissions.
Takeaway
Testing for HIV early in places like STD clinics is cheaper and helps people get treatment sooner, which is better for everyone.
Methodology
A health state transition model was developed to compare the cost-effectiveness of HIV screening in different settings.
Potential Biases
Potential underestimation of costs for screening in STD clinics due to not including fixed costs.
Limitations
Limited data on CD4 count at diagnosis and linkage to care may affect generalizability.
Participant Demographics
The study focused on settings with a high prevalence of HIV, particularly among men who have sex with men.
Statistical Information
Confidence Interval
95% CI
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website