ArticlePloS one2013
The PrePex device is unlikely to achieve cost-savings compared to the forceps-guided method in male circumcision programs in sub-Saharan Africa.
Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Estimating the Cost of Early Infant Male Circumcision in Zimbabwe: Results From a Randomized Noninferiority Trial of AccuCirc Device Versus Mogen Clamp.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2015Trial
- Simple circumcision device: proof of concept for a single-visit, adjustable device to facilitate safe adult male circumcision.Fertility and sterility · 2014Trial
- Alisklamp versus Conventional Dorsal Slit Circumcision: A Multicentric Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Safety and efficacy of the PrePex device in HIV-positive men: A single-arm study in Zimbabwe.PloS one · 2017Article
- Comparative Cost of Early Infant Male Circumcision by Nurse-Midwives and Doctors in Zimbabwe.Global health, science and practice · 2016Article
- Evaluating Opportunities for Achieving Cost Efficiencies Through the Introduction of PrePex Device Male Circumcision in Adult VMMC Programs in Zambia and Zimbabwe.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2016Article
- Comparative Cost Analysis of Surgical and PrePex Device Male Circumcision in Zimbabwe and Mozambique.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2016Article
- Participant Experiences and Views of Odor and PrePex Device Removal Pain in a VMMC Pilot Study in Botswana.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2016Article
- Psychosocial Results from a Phase I Trial of a Nonsurgical Circumcision Device for Adult Men in Zimbabwe.AIDS patient care and STDs · 2016Article
- Voluntary medical male circumcision in resource-constrained settings.Nature reviews. Urology · 2015Review
- Evaluating the cost of adult voluntary medical male circumcision in a mixed (surgical and PrePex) site compared to a hypothetical PrePex-only site in South Africa.Global health action · 2015Article
- Observational
- Cost analysis of integrating the PrePex medical device into a voluntary medical male circumcision program in Zimbabwe.PloS one · 2014Article
- Routine paediatric sickle cell disease (SCD) outpatient care in a rural Kenyan hospital: utilization and costs.PloS one · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMale circumcision (MC) reduces the risk of heterosexual HIV acquisition in men by approximately 60%. MC programs for HIV prevention are currently being scaled-up in fourteen countries in sub-Saharan Africa. The current standard surgical technique for MC in many sub-Saharan African countries is the forceps-guided male circumcision (FGMC) method. The PrePex male circumcision (PMC) method could replace FGMC and potentially reduce MC programming costs. We compared the potential costs of introducing the PrePex device into MC programming to the cost of the forceps-guided method.
methodsData were obtained from the Nyanza Reproductive Health Society (NRHS), an MC service delivery organization in Kenya, and from the Kenya Ministry of Health. Analyses are based on 48,265 MC procedures performed in four Districts in western Kenya from 2009 through 2011. Data were entered into the WHO/UNAIDS Decision Makers Program Planning Tool. The tool assesses direct and indirect costs of MC programming. Various sensitivity analyses were performed. Costs were discounted at an annual rate of 6% and are presented in United States Dollars.
resultsNot including the costs of the PrePex device or referral costs for men with phimosis/tight foreskin, the costs of one MC surgery were $44.54-$49.02 and $54.52-$55.29 for PMC and FGMC, respectively.
conclusionThe PrePex device is unlikely to result in significant cost-savings in comparison to the forceps-guided method. MC programmers should target other aspects of the male circumcision minimum package for improved cost efficiency.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.