Triangulation of Routine Antenatal HIV Prevalence Data and Adjusted HIV Estimates in Mozambique

BACKGROUND

Routine health system data are central to monitoring HIV trends. In Mozambique, the reported number of women receiving antenatal care (ANC) and antiretroviral therapy for prevention of mother-to-child transmission (PMTCT) has exceeded the Spectrum-estimated number of pregnant women since 2017. In some provinces, reported HIV prevalence in pregnant women has declined faster than epidemiologically plausible. We hypothesized that these issues are linked and caused by programmatic overenumeration of HIV-negative pregnant women at ANC.

METHODS

We triangulated program-reported ANC client numbers with survey-based fertility estimates and facility birth data adjusted for the proportion of facility births. We used survey-reported ANC attendance to produce adjusted time series of HIV prevalence in pregnant women, adjusted for hypothesized program double counting. We calibrated the Spectrum HIV estimation models to adjusted HIV prevalence data to produce adjusted adult and pediatric HIV estimates.

RESULTS

ANC client numbers were not consistent with facility birth data or modeled population estimates indicating ANC data quality issues in all provinces. Adjusted provincial ANC HIV prevalence in 2021 was median 45% [interquartile range 35%-52% or 2.3 percentage points (interquartile range 2.5-3.5)] higher than reported HIV prevalence. In 2021, calibrating to adjusted antenatal HIV prevalence lowered PMTCT coverage to less than 100% in most provinces and increased the modeled number of new child infections by 35%. The adjusted results better reconciled adult and pediatric antiretroviral treatment coverage and antenatal HIV prevalence with regional fertility estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjusting HIV prevalence in pregnant women using nationally representative household survey data on ANC attendance produced estimates more consistent with surveillance data. The number of children living with HIV in Mozambique has been substantially underestimated because of biased routine ANC prevalence. Renewed focus on HIV surveillance among pregnant women would improve PMTCT coverage and pediatric HIV estimates.

Framework for determining the optimal course of action when efficiency and affordability measures differ by perspective in cost-effectiveness analysis-with an illustrative case of HIV treatment in Mozambique

BACKGROUND

Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is a standard tool for evaluating health programs and informing decisions about resource allocation and prioritization. Most CEAs evaluating health interventions in low- and middle-income countries adopt a health sector perspective, accounting for resources funded by international donors and country governments, while often excluding out-of-pocket expenditures and time costs borne by program beneficiaries. Even when patients' costs are included, a companion analysis focused on the patient perspective is rarely performed. We view this as a missed opportunity.

METHODS

We developed methods for assessing intervention affordability and evaluating whether optimal interventions from the health sector perspective also represent efficient and affordable options for patients. We mapped the five different patterns that a comparison of the perspective results can yield into a practical framework, and we provided guidance for researchers and decision-makers on how to use results from multiple perspectives. To illustrate the methodology, we conducted a CEA of six HIV treatment delivery models in Mozambique. We conducted a Monte Carlo microsimulation with probabilistic sensitivity analysis from both patient and health sector perspectives, generating incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for the treatment approaches. We also calculated annualized patient costs for the treatment approaches, comparing the costs with an affordability threshold. We then compared the cost-effectiveness and affordability results from the two perspectives using the framework we developed.

RESULTS

In this case, the two perspectives did not produce a shared optimal approach for HIV treatment at the willingness-to-pay threshold of 0.3 × Mozambique's annual GDP per capita per DALY averted. However, the clinical 6-month antiretroviral drug distribution strategy, which is optimal from the health sector perspective, is efficient and affordable from the patient perspective. All treatment approaches, except clinical 1-month distributions of antiretroviral drugs which were standard before Covid-19, had an annual cost to patients less than the country's annual average for out-of-pocket health expenditures.

CONCLUSION

Including a patient perspective in CEAs and explicitly considering affordability offers decision-makers additional insights either by confirming that the optimal strategy from the health sector perspective is also efficient and affordable from the patient perspective or by identifying incongruencies in value or affordability that could affect patient participation.