ArticleApplied health economics and health policy2025
Budget Impact Analysis of Implementing Antenatal Care Recommendations for Positive Pregnancy Outcomes at Public Primary Facilities in Tanzania.
Article in Applied health economics and health policy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTanzania recently changed its antenatal care (ANC) guidelines to reduce perinatal mortality and improve the experience of pregnancy care. The new guideline recommends increasing the number of ANC visits from four to eight and introducing one routine ultrasound scan, among other recommendations. We estimated the budget impact of implementing the new guideline compared to the previous focused ANC guideline at public dispensaries and health centers.
methodIn a dynamic Markov model, we prospectively followed annual cohorts of between 2.3 and 2.6 million pregnant women who will be attending ANC at dispensaries and health centers for 5 years. We allowed a population of pregnant women into the model every year and women exit the model at delivery. We calculated the cost of medicines, medical supplies, and laboratory supplies required to produce services from a public health system perspective. Our model neither estimated condition-related costs nor health effects. The budget impact was calculated as the difference in the estimated costs between the two guidelines. We conducted scenario analyses to explore attending more visits and different assumptions to calculate the target population.
resultsWe estimated that implementing the new ANC guideline would have a cumulative budget impact of around US$154 million over 5 years. The budget required will increase from US$137 million under the focused ANC guideline to US$291 million under the new guideline. Laboratory supplies will consume 47% of the estimated budget under the new guideline. We expect the annual budget impact to be US$38 million in the first year of implementation and US$32 million in the fifth year. We assumed that by the fifth year, 82% of all pregnant women would have had four or more visits. The budget impact would increase to US$214 million, with the proportion of pregnant women attending four or more ANC visits reaching 90% within 5 years.
conclusionScaling up the implementation of the new ANC guideline at public dispensaries and health centers may substantially increase the supplies required to produce ANC services, particularly laboratory supplies. Studies on the health impact of the new guideline are warranted to estimate the value for money.
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.