Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37310935›Full record

ArticlePLOS global public health2023

Testing for SARS-CoV-2 in resource-limited settings: A cost analysis study of diagnostic tests using different Ag-RDTs and RT-PCR technologies in Mozambique.

Nelmo Jordão Manjate, Nádia Sitoe, Júlia Sambo, Esperança Guimarães, Neide Canana, Jorfélia Chilaúle, Sofia Viegas, Neuza Nguenha, Ilesh Jani, Giuliano Russo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS global public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

10 authors.

Nelmo Jordão ManjateInstituto Nacional de Saúde, Marracuene, Mozambique.
Nádia SitoeInstituto Nacional de Saúde, Marracuene, Mozambique.
Júlia SamboInstituto Nacional de Saúde, Marracuene, Mozambique.
Esperança GuimarãesInstituto Nacional de Saúde, Marracuene, Mozambique.
Neide CananaMalaria Consortium, Maputo, Mozambique.
Jorfélia ChilaúleInstituto Nacional de Saúde, Marracuene, Mozambique.
Sofia ViegasInstituto Nacional de Saúde, Marracuene, Mozambique.
Neuza NguenhaInstituto Nacional de Saúde, Marracuene, Mozambique.
Ilesh JaniInstituto Nacional de Saúde, Marracuene, Mozambique.
Giuliano RussoThe Wolfson Institute for Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, The United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2716-369X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Early diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 is fundamental to reduce the risk of community transmission and mortality, as well as public sector expenditures. Three years after the onset of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, there are still gaps on what is known regarding costs and cost drivers for the major diagnostic testing strategies in low- middle-income countries (LMICs). This study aimed to estimate the cost of SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis of symptomatic suspected patients by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and antigen rapid diagnostic tests (Ag-RDT) in Mozambique. We conducted a retrospective cost analysis from the provider's perspective using a bottom-up, micro-costing approach, and compared the direct costs of two nasopharyngeal Ag-RDTs (Panbio and Standard Q) against the costs of three nasal Ag-RDTs (Panbio, COVIOS and LumiraDx), and RT-PCR. The study was undertaken from November 2020 to December 2021 in the country's capital city Maputo, in four healthcare facilities at primary, secondary and tertiary levels of care, and at one reference laboratory. All the resources necessary for RT-PCR and Ag-RDT tests were identified, quantified, valued, and the unit costs per test and per facility were estimated. Our findings show that the mean unit cost of SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis by nasopharyngeal Ag-RDTs was MZN 728.00 (USD 11.90, at 2020 exchange rates) for Panbio and MZN 728.00 (USD 11.90) for Standard Q. For diagnosis by nasal Ag-RDTs, Panbio was MZN 547.00 (USD 8.90), COVIOS was MZN 768.00 (USD 12.50), and LumiraDx was MZN 798.00 (USD 13.00). Medical supplies expenditures represented the main driver of the final cost (>50%), followed by personnel and overhead costs (mean 15% for each). The mean unit cost regardless of the type of Ag-RDT was MZN 714.00 (USD 11.60). Diagnosis by RT-PCR cost MZN 2,414 (USD 39.00) per test. Our sensitivity analysis suggests that focussing on reducing medical supplies costs would be the most cost-saving strategy for governments in LMICs, particularly as international prices decrease. The cost of SARS-CoV-2 diagnosis using Ag-RDTs was three times lower than RT-PCR testing. Governments in LMICs can include cost-efficient Ag-RDTs in their screening strategies, or RT-PCR if international costs of such supplies decrease further in the future. Additional analyses are recommended as the costs of testing can be influenced by the sample referral system.

Identifiers

PMID37310935
PMCPMC10263322

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.