Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26413788›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Improving Maternal Care through a State-Wide Health Insurance Program: A Cost and Cost-Effectiveness Study in Rural Nigeria.

Gabriela B Gomez, Nicola Foster, Daniella Brals, Heleen E Nelissen, Oladimeji A Bolarinwa, Marleen E Hendriks, Alexander C Boers, Diederik van Eck, Nicole Rosendaal, Peju Adenusi and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Gabriela B GomezDepartment of Global Health/Amsterdam Institute for Global Health and Development, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Nicola FosterHealth Economics Unit, School of Public Health and Family Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Daniella BralsDepartment of Global Health/Amsterdam Institute for Global Health and Development, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Heleen E NelissenDepartment of Global Health/Amsterdam Institute for Global Health and Development, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Oladimeji A BolarinwaDepartment of Epidemiology and Community Health, University of Ilorin Teaching Hospital, Ilorin, Nigeria.
Marleen E HendriksDepartment of Global Health/Amsterdam Institute for Global Health and Development, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Alexander C BoersDepartment of Global Health/Amsterdam Institute for Global Health and Development, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Diederik van EckPharmaccess Foundation, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Nicole RosendaalDepartment of Global Health/Amsterdam Institute for Global Health and Development, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Peju AdenusiHygeia Nigeria Ltd, Lagos, Nigeria.
Kayode AgbedeOgo Oluwa Hospital, Bacita, Kwara State, Nigeria.
Tanimola M AkandeDepartment of Epidemiology and Community Health, University of Ilorin Teaching Hospital, Ilorin, Nigeria.
Michael Boele van HensbroekGlobal Child Health Group, Emma Children's Hospital AMC, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ferdinand W WitDepartment of Global Health/Amsterdam Institute for Global Health and Development, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Catherine A HankinsDepartment of Global Health/Amsterdam Institute for Global Health and Development, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Constance SchultszDepartment of Global Health/Amsterdam Institute for Global Health and Development, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhile the Nigerian government has made progress towards the Millennium Development Goals, further investments are needed to achieve the targets of post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals, including Universal Health Coverage. Economic evaluations of innovative interventions can help inform investment decisions in resource-constrained settings. We aim to assess the cost and cost-effectiveness of maternal care provided within the new Kwara State Health Insurance program (KSHI) in rural Nigeria. METHODS AND

findingsWe used a decision analytic model to simulate a cohort of pregnant women. The primary outcome is the incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of the KSHI scenario compared to the current standard of care. Intervention cost from a healthcare provider perspective included service delivery costs and above-service level costs; these were evaluated in a participating hospital and using financial records from the managing organisations, respectively. Standard of care costs from a provider perspective were derived from the literature using an ingredient approach. We generated 95% credibility intervals around the primary outcome through probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) based on a Monte Carlo simulation. We conducted one-way sensitivity analyses across key model parameters and assessed the sensitivity of our results to the performance of the base case separately through a scenario analysis. Finally, we assessed the sustainability and feasibility of this program's scale up within the State's healthcare financing structure through a budget impact analysis. The KSHI scenario results in a health benefit to patients at a higher cost compared to the base case. The mean ICER (US$46.4/disability-adjusted life year averted) is considered very cost-effective compared to a willingness-to-pay threshold of one gross domestic product per capita (Nigeria, US$ 2012, 2,730). Our conclusion was robust to uncertainty in parameters estimates (PSA: median US$49.1, 95% credible interval 21.9-152.3), during one-way sensitivity analyses, and when cost, quality, cost and utilization parameters of the base case scenario were changed. The sustainability of this program's scale up by the State is dependent on further investments in healthcare.

conclusionsThis study provides evidence that the investment made by the KSHI program in rural Nigeria is likely to have been cost-effective; however, further healthcare investments are needed for this program to be successfully expanded within Kwara State. Policy makers should consider supporting financial initiatives to reduce maternal mortality tackling both supply and demand issues in the access to care.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisRural PopulationBudgetsCohort StudiesFemaleHealth ServicesHospitalsHumansInsurance, HealthMaternal HealthNigeriaPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID26413788
PMCPMC4587550

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.