ArticleJournal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999)2016
Comparative Cost Analysis of Surgical and PrePex Device Male Circumcision in Zimbabwe and Mozambique.
Article in Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost comparison of the ShangRing device versus Mogen clamp for early infant male circumcision in Sub-Saharan Africa.PloS one · 2026Trial
- Trial
- Article
- VMMC Devices-Introducing a New Innovation to a Public Health Intervention.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe PrePex device has proven to be safe for voluntary medical male circumcision (VMMC) in adults in several African countries. Costing studies were conducted as part of a PrePex/Surgery comparison study in Zimbabwe and a pilot implementation study in Mozambique.
methodsThe studies calculated per male circumcision unit costs using a cost-analysis approach. Both direct costs (consumable and nonconsumable supplies, device, personnel, associated staff training) and selected indirect costs (capital and support personnel costs) were calculated.
resultsThe cost comparison in Zimbabwe showed a unit cost per VMMC of $45.50 for PrePex and $53.08 for surgery. The unit cost difference was based on higher personnel and consumable supplies costs for the surgical procedure, which used disposable instrument kits. In Mozambique, the costing analysis estimated a higher unit cost for PrePex circumcision ($40.66) than for surgery ($20.85) because of higher consumable costs, particularly the PrePex device and lower consumable supplies costs for the surgical procedure using reusable instruments. Supplies and direct staff costs contributed 87.2% for PrePex and 65.8% for surgical unit costs in Mozambique. DISCUSSION: PrePex device male circumcision could potentially be cheaper than surgery in Zimbabwe, especially in settings that lack the infrastructure and personnel required for surgical VMMC, and this might result in programmatic cost savings. In Mozambique, the surgical procedure seems to be less costly compared with PrePex mainly because of higher consumable supplies costs. With reduced device unit costs, PrePex VMMC could become more cost-efficient and considered as complementary for Mozambique's VMMC scale-up program.
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.