ObjectiveTo identify economic evaluations of interventions to control STIs and HIV targeting young people, and to assess how costs and outcomes are measured in these studies.DesignSystematic review.Data sourcesSeven databases were searched (Medline (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), Web of Science, PsycINFO, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, NHS Health Technology Assessment and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects) from January 1999 to April 2019. Key search terms were STIs (chlamydia, gonorrhoea, syphilis) and HIV, cost benefit, cost utility, economic evaluation, public health, screening, testing and control.Review methodsStudies were included that measured costs and outcomes to inform an economic evaluation of any programme to control STIs and HIV targeting individuals predominantly below 30 years of age at risk of, or affected by, one or multiple STIs and/or HIV in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries. Data were extracted and tabulated and included study results and characteristics of economic evaluations. Study quality was assessed using the Philips and BMJ checklists. Results were synthesised narratively.Results9530 records were screened and categorised. Of these, 31 were included for data extraction and critical appraisal. The majority of studies assessed the cost-effectiveness or cost-utility of screening interventions for chlamydia from a provider perspective. The main outcome measures were major outcomes averted and quality-adjusted life years. Studies evaluated direct medical costs, for example, programme costs and 11 included indirect costs, such as productivity losses. The study designs were predominantly model-based with significant heterogeneity between the models.Discussion/ConclusionNone of the economic evaluations encompassed aspects of equity or context, which are highly relevant to sexual health decision-makers. The review demonstrated heterogeneity in approaches to evaluate costs and outcomes for STI/HIV control programmes. The low quality of available studies along with the limited focus, that is, almost all studies relate to chlamydia, highlight the need for high-quality economic evaluations to inform the commissioning of sexual health services.

Background Schistosomiasis is a neglected tropical disease (NTD) that affects over 230 million people in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) and can lead to long-term debilitating health effects. It is associated with impoverishment and has been prioritised by the World Health Organization for prevention, control and elimination. This systematic review aimed to identify and evaluate existing economic evaluations of interventions to tackle schistosomiasis. Methodology A comprehensive search strategy of four databases and additional hand-searching was employed on the 17th July 2020. The articles were screened and sorted using a two-stage classification system. Full economic evaluations published in English between 1st January 1998 and 17th July 2020 were included, and methodological quality was appraised using the international decision support initiative (iDSI), Phillips and Evers checklists. Results Eighteen economic evaluations were identified, nine trial-based and nine model-based, with the majority focused on preventative chemotherapy. Schistosomiasis interventions were collectively found to be cost-effective, but the quantity and quality of studies were limited. The outcome measures and time-horizons utilised varied substantially making comparison difficult. The majority of papers failed to address equity and affordability. Conclusion Several methodological issues were highlighted which might have implications for optimal decision-making. Future research is needed to ensure the standardisation of methods, in order to ensure that scarce healthcare resources are focussed on the most cost-effective programmes to tackle schistosomiasis and other NTDs.

Conclusion Existing and new services must complete comprehensive evaluations to establish whether services are inclusive, accessible and address, rather than exacerbate, sexual health inequalities. Now is a critical time to identify the effectiveness of these digital health interventions given the wave of service expansions across the UK.