Background Cost remains an important barrier to HIV pre-exposure prophlyaxis (PrEP) delivery in Africa. Simplified delivery models that reduce costs without compromising PrEP outcomes are needed. The JiPime-JiPrEP trial tested a model of six-month PrEP dispensing supported with interim HIV self-testing (HIVST) and found non-inferior HIV testing, PrEP refilling, and adherence compared to three-month PrEP dispensing and quarterly clinic visits, the standard-of-care (SOC). We estimated the cost of this novel differentiated PrEP delivery model compared to SOC in Kenya. Methods Using activity-based micro-costing (payer perspective) and time-and-motion observations, we estimated the cost of PrEP delivery (per client-month) in the intervention and SOC between May 2018 to December 2019. Data from budgets and expense reports, published documents, and interviews informed our estimates. We calculated costs over a one-year horizon for: 1) the trial scenario (i.e., costs within the trial), and 2) the Ministy of Health (MOH) scenario (i.e., hypothetical costs at public clinics). Estimates were in 2019 US dollars and excluded research-related costs. Results The mean personnel time attributable to PrEP delivery was 76 minutes per visit and 152 minutes projected over a year in the intervention and 54 minutes per visit and 282 minutes per year in the SOC. In the trial scenario, PrEP delivery cost $17.73 per client-month in the intervention (n=2039 PrEP-months) and $25.50 in the SOC (n=913 PrEP-months). The projected cost of PrEP delivery in the MOH scenario was $11.94 in the intervention and $14.76 in the SOC, with the addition of HIVST kits in the intervention more than offset by personnel savings. In this scenario, personnel (intervention: 55%; SOC: 44%) and medication (intervention: 16%; SOC: 32%) were the primary cost drivers. Including serum creatine testing twice a year in the MOH scenario resulted in a slight increase in the cost of PrEP delivery in the intervention ($12.88 per client-month) versus SOC ($16.17 per client-month). Conclusions Six-month PrEP with interim HIVST demonstrated lower costs than three-month dispensing, with decreased personnel time. Scale-up of PrEP delivery requires efficient use of limited resources; the savings in this model of PrEP delivery could be redirected towards currently unmet medical needs. Clinial trial number NCT03593629||<a href="https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/">https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/</a> with the Clinical Trial Registry (Registration date: 2018-07-20).

Opportunity for cost savings with a novel differentiated model of PrEP delivery: a comparative costing analysis of six-month PrEP supported by interim HIV self-testing and standard of care PrEP dispensing in Kenya

期刊论文
出版模式：

开放获取
发表日期：

2025年7月1日

查看全文

Dorothy I. Mangale,
Jesse Heitner,
Katrina F. Ortblad,
Peter Mogere,
Catherine Kiptinness,
Nelly R. Mugo,
Jared M. Baeten,
Kenneth Ngure,
Ruanne Barnabas

摘要

Background

Cost remains an important barrier to HIV pre-exposure prophlyaxis (PrEP) delivery in Africa. Simplified delivery models that reduce costs without compromising PrEP outcomes are needed. The JiPime-JiPrEP trial tested a model of six-month PrEP dispensing supported with interim HIV self-testing (HIVST) and found non-inferior HIV testing, PrEP refilling, and adherence compared to three-month PrEP dispensing and quarterly clinic visits, the standard-of-care (SOC). We estimated the cost of this novel differentiated PrEP delivery model compared to SOC in Kenya.

Methods

Using activity-based micro-costing (payer perspective) and time-and-motion observations, we estimated the cost of PrEP delivery (per client-month) in the intervention and SOC between May 2018 to December 2019. Data from budgets and expense reports, published documents, and interviews informed our estimates. We calculated costs over a one-year horizon for: 1) the trial scenario (i.e., costs within the trial), and 2) the Ministy of Health (MOH) scenario (i.e., hypothetical costs at public clinics). Estimates were in 2019 US dollars and excluded research-related costs.

Results

The mean personnel time attributable to PrEP delivery was 76 minutes per visit and 152 minutes projected over a year in the intervention and 54 minutes per visit and 282 minutes per year in the SOC. In the trial scenario, PrEP delivery cost $17.73 per client-month in the intervention (n=2039 PrEP-months) and $25.50 in the SOC (n=913 PrEP-months). The projected cost of PrEP delivery in the MOH scenario was $11.94 in the intervention and $14.76 in the SOC, with the addition of HIVST kits in the intervention more than offset by personnel savings. In this scenario, personnel (intervention: 55%; SOC: 44%) and medication (intervention: 16%; SOC: 32%) were the primary cost drivers. Including serum creatine testing twice a year in the MOH scenario resulted in a slight increase in the cost of PrEP delivery in the intervention ($12.88 per client-month) versus SOC ($16.17 per client-month).

Conclusions

Six-month PrEP with interim HIVST demonstrated lower costs than three-month dispensing, with decreased personnel time. Scale-up of PrEP delivery requires efficient use of limited resources; the savings in this model of PrEP delivery could be redirected towards currently unmet medical needs.

Clinial trial number

NCT03593629||https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ with the Clinical Trial Registry (Registration date: 2018-07-20).