ArticlePloS one2013
Reach and cost-effectiveness of the PrePex device for safe male circumcision in Uganda.
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 31 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
31 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Knowledge and Attitudes of Circumcision among Adult Male Clients Receiving Care in a Teaching Hospital in Kigali City, Rwanda.Rwanda journal of medicine and health sciences · 2024Article
- Implementing quality management strategies improves clinical quality as a voluntary medical male circumcision program in Namibia matures: a process analysis.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- Cost-effectiveness of HIV Prevention Interventions in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Systematic Review.EClinicalMedicine · 2019Article
- Timing of adverse events among voluntary medical male circumcision clients: Implications from routine service delivery in Zimbabwe.PloS one · 2018Article
- Implementing voluntary medical male circumcision using an innovative, integrated, health systems approach: experiences from 21 districts in Zimbabwe.Global health action · 2018Article
- Long term post PrePex male circumcision outcomes in an urban population in Uganda: a cohort study.BMC research notes · 2017Article
- Adverse event profile of a mature voluntary medical male circumcision programme performing PrePex and surgical procedures in Zimbabwe.Journal of the International AIDS Society · 2017Article
- Safety and efficacy of the PrePex device in HIV-positive men: A single-arm study in Zimbabwe.PloS one · 2017Article
- Innovative Demand Creation for Voluntary Medical Male Circumcision Targeting a High Impact Male Population: A Pilot Study Engaging Pregnant Women at Antenatal Clinics in Kampala, Uganda.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 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
- Safety Profile of PrePex Male Circumcision Device and Client Satisfaction With Adolescent Males Aged 13-17 Years in Zimbabwe.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2016Article
- Safety and Acceptability of the PrePex Device When Used in Routine Male Circumcision Service Delivery During Active Surveillance in Zimbabwe.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
- Comparative Cost Analysis of Surgical and PrePex Device Male Circumcision in Zimbabwe and Mozambique.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2016Article
- Article
- Article
- Voluntary medical male circumcision in resource-constrained settings.Nature reviews. Urology · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionModelling, supported by the USAID Health Policy Initiative and UNAIDS, performed in 2011, indicated that Uganda would need to perform 4.2 million medical male circumcisions (MMCs) to reach 80% prevalence. Since 2010 Uganda has completed 380,000 circumcisions, and has set a national target of 1 million for 2013.
objectiveTo evaluate the relative reach and cost-effectiveness of PrePex compared to the current surgical SMC method and to determine the effect that this might have in helping to achieve the Uganda national SMC targets.
methodsA cross-sectional descriptive cost-analysis study conducted at International Hospital Kampala over ten weeks from August to October 2012. Data collected during the performance of 625 circumcisions using PrePex was compared to data previously collected from 10,000 circumcisions using a surgical circumcision method at the same site. Ethical approval was obtained.
resultsThe moderate adverse events (AE) ratio when using the PrePex device was 2% and no severe adverse events were encountered, which is comparable to the surgical method, thus the AE rate has no effect on the reach or cost-effectiveness of PrePex. The unit cost to perform one circumcision using PrePex is $30.55, 35% ($7.90) higher than the current surgical method, but the PrePex method improves operator efficiency by 60%, meaning that a team can perform 24 completed circumcisions compared to 15 by the surgical method. The cost-effectiveness of PrePex, comparing the cost of performing circumcisions to the future cost savings of potentially averted HIV infections, is just 2% less than the current surgical method, at a device cost price of $20.
conclusionPrePex is a viable SMC tool for scale-up with unrivalled potential for superior reach, however national targets can only be met with effective demand creation and availability of trained human resource.
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.