A cost-effectiveness analysis of a home-based HIV counselling and testing intervention versus the standard (facility based) HIV testing strategy in rural South Africa

SOURCE: PLoS One
OUTPUT TYPE: Journal Article
PUBLICATION YEAR: 2015
TITLE AUTHOR(S): H.Tabana, L.Nkonki, C.Hongoro, T.Doherty, A.M.Ekstrom, R.Naik, W.Zembe-Mkabile, D.Jackson, A.Thorson
KEYWORDS: HIV/AIDS, HOME CARE, HOME-BASED HIV COUNSELING AND TESTING (VCT), RURAL COMMUNITIES, VOLUNTARY COUNSELING AND TESTING (VCT)
Print: HSRC Library: shelf number 8786
HANDLE: 20.500.11910/1817
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11910/1817

Download this report

If you would like to obtain a copy of this Research Output, please contact Hanlie Baudin at researchoutputs@hsrc.ac.za.

Abstract

There is growing evidence concerning the acceptability and feasibility of home-based HIV testing. However, less is known about the cost-effectiveness of the approach yet it is a critical component to guide decisions about scaling up access to HIV testing. This study examined the cost-effectiveness of a home-based HIV testing intervention in rural South Africa. Two alternatives: clinic and home-based HIV counselling and testing were compared. Costs were analysed from a provider's perspective for the period of January to December 2010. The outcome, HIV counselling and testing (HCT) uptake was obtained from the Good Start home-based HIV counselling and testing (HBHCT) cluster randomised control trial undertaken in KwaZulu-Natal province. Cost-effectiveness was estimated for a target population of 22,099 versus 23,864 people for intervention and control communities respectively. Average costs were calculated as the cost per client tested, while cost-effectiveness was calculated as the cost per additional client tested through HBHCT. Based on effectiveness of 37% in the intervention (HBHCT) arm compared to 16% in control arm, home based testing costs US$29 compared to US$38 per person for clinic HCT. The HBHCT was less costly and more effective. Home-based HCT could present a cost-effective alternative for rural 'hard to reach' populations depending on affordability by the health system, and should be considered as part of community outreach programs.