Cost Effectiveness Analysis of Optimal Malaria Control Strategies in Kenya

Abstract

Malaria remains a leading cause of mortality and morbidity among the children under five and pregnant women in sub-Saharan Africa, but it is preventable and controllable provided current recommended interventions are properly implemented. Better utilization of malaria intervention strategies will ensure the gain for the value for money and producing health improvements in the most cost effective way. The purpose of the value for money drive is to develop a better understanding (and better articulation) of costs and results so that more informed, evidence-based choices could be made. Cost effectiveness analysis is carried out to inform decision makers on how to determine where to allocate resources for malaria interventions. This study carries out cost effective analysis of one or all possible combinations of the optimal malaria control strategies (Insecticide Treated Bednets-ITNs, Treatment, Indoor Residual Spray-IRS and Intermittent Preventive Treatment for Pregnant Women-IPTp) for the four different transmission settings in order to assess the extent to which the intervention strategies are beneficial and cost effective. For the four different transmission settings in Kenya the optimal solution for the 15 strategies and their associated effectiveness are computed. Cost-effective analysis using Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) was done after ranking the strategies in order of the increasing effectiveness (total infections averted). The findings shows that for the endemic regions the combination of ITNs, IRS, and IPTp was the most cost-effective of all the combined strategies developed in this study for malaria disease control and prevention; for the epidemic prone areas is the combination of the treatment and IRS; for seasonal areas is the use of ITNs plus treatment; and for the low risk areas is the use of treatment only. Malaria transmission in Kenya can be minimized through tailor-made intervention strategies for malaria control which produces health improvements in the most cost effective way for different epidemiological zones. This offers the good value for money for the public health programs and can guide in the allocation of malaria control resources for the post-2015 malaria eradication strategies and the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals.

Dynamics of Amoebiasis Transmission: Stability and Sensitivity Analysis

“…The basic reproduction number of this model is determined by applying the next generation operator, a method derived from the theory of the center manifold and developed by P.van den Driessche and J. Watmough (2002) [25,27,28]. P. van den Driessche's method for computing the basic reproduction number is based on the rate of change in composition of the infectious classes E, I and C. For this reason, we rewrite Equations (2) to (4) in the form of a vector equation:…”

“…According to the definition provided by Chitnis et al [38] and reading [28], the normalized forward sensitivity index of the basic reproduction number R 0 to the parameter, say P, of the epidemic model is denoted by Υ R 0 P and defined as:…”

Optimal Propagating Fronts Using Hamilton-Jacobi Equations

“…where h : R × R × [0, T] → R andh : R → R is a final penalty term, which we want to minimize subject to the normal flow equation in (3). More generally, let us consider the running-time cost functional…”

“…In fact, they are the basis of a widely-studied family of methods usually referred to as level set methods [1]. Hamilton-Jacobi equations are useful not only for the purpose of modeling dynamic fronts, but also to solve optimal control problems over finite and infinite horizons [2], with a number of different applications (see, e.g., [3][4][5]). In this paper, we propose a novel approach to construct optimal propagating fronts with propagation speed selected in order to minimize a suitable cost functional accounting for a desired front behavior.…”

Optimal Control Analysis of a Mathematical Model for Breast Cancer

“…We defined the positive constant u max accordingly. We also define the set Ω of admissible controls to be all Lebesgue measurable functions that take on values in the control set [13,46,47] …”