Cost Effectiveness Analysis of Using Insecticide Treated Mosquito Net and Seasonal Malarial Chemoprevention in Jigawa State, Nigeria
Author(s)
Sharfuddeen Safiyanu, BSc, RN, RNA, MHE.
Nurse Anesthetist, General Hospital Jigawa State, Nigeria, Dutse, Nigeria.
Nurse Anesthetist, General Hospital Jigawa State, Nigeria, Dutse, Nigeria.
OBJECTIVES: This study compared the cost-effectiveness of Insecticide-Treated Nets (ITNs) and Seasonal Malaria Chemoprevention (SMC) in reducing malaria burden, estimating economic and health outcomes to inform policy decisions.
METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional analysis was conducted using 2022-2023 data from Kafin Hausa General Hospital. Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) evaluated total intervention costs, cost per case averted, and cost per life saved. Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) were calculated, assuming equivalent effectiveness between interventions.
RESULTS: ITNs demonstrated superior cost-effectiveness, with a per-treatment cost of $7 compared to $12 for SMC. Total implementation costs were $75,719 for ITNs versus $129,804 for SMC, yielding savings of $54,085. Both interventions averted 4,110 lives (mortality rate: 62 deaths), with equivalent effectiveness. Cost per case averted was $509.84 (ITNs) and $297.37 (SMC); however, ITNs achieved lower total costs without compromising outcomes. ICER analysis confirmed ITNs as the dominant strategy due to identical effectiveness at reduced costs.
CONCLUSIONS: ITNs are more cost-effective than SMC in Jigawa State, offering significant savings while maintaining equivalent health benefits. Policymakers should prioritize ITN distribution to optimize resource allocation. Further research is needed to assess long-term sustainability and epidemiological impacts of sustained ITN use.
METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional analysis was conducted using 2022-2023 data from Kafin Hausa General Hospital. Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) evaluated total intervention costs, cost per case averted, and cost per life saved. Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICERs) were calculated, assuming equivalent effectiveness between interventions.
RESULTS: ITNs demonstrated superior cost-effectiveness, with a per-treatment cost of $7 compared to $12 for SMC. Total implementation costs were $75,719 for ITNs versus $129,804 for SMC, yielding savings of $54,085. Both interventions averted 4,110 lives (mortality rate: 62 deaths), with equivalent effectiveness. Cost per case averted was $509.84 (ITNs) and $297.37 (SMC); however, ITNs achieved lower total costs without compromising outcomes. ICER analysis confirmed ITNs as the dominant strategy due to identical effectiveness at reduced costs.
CONCLUSIONS: ITNs are more cost-effective than SMC in Jigawa State, offering significant savings while maintaining equivalent health benefits. Policymakers should prioritize ITN distribution to optimize resource allocation. Further research is needed to assess long-term sustainability and epidemiological impacts of sustained ITN use.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2025-09, ISPOR Real-World Evidence Summit 2025, Tokyo, Japan
Value in Health Regional, Volume 49S (September 2025)
Code
RWD211
Topic Subcategory
Distributed Data & Research Networks
Disease
SDC: Pediatrics