Rationing Antiretroviral Therapy for HIV/AIDS in Africa: Efficiency, Equity, and Reality

Background: Rationing of access to antiretroviral therapy already exists in sub-Saharan Africa and will intensify as national treatment programs develop. The number of people who are medically eligible for therapy will far exceed the human, infrastructural, and financial resources available, making rationing of public treatment services inevitable. Methods: We identified 15 criteria by which antiretroviral therapy could be rationed in African countries and analyzed the resulting rationing systems across 5 domains: clinical effectiveness, implementation feasibility, cost, economic efficiency, and social equity. Findings: Rationing can be explicit or implicit. Access to treatment can be explicitly targeted to priority subpopulations such as mothers of newborns, skilled workers, students, or poor people. Explicit conditions can also be set that cause differential access, such as residence in a designated geographic area, co-payment, access to testing, or a demonstrated commitment to adhere to therapy. Implicit rationing on the basis of first-come, first-served or queuing will arise when no explicit system is enforced; implicit systems almost always allow a high degree of queue-jumping by the elite. There is a direct tradeoff between economic efficiency and social equity. Interpretation: Rationing is inevitable in most countries for some period of time. Without deliberate social policy decisions, implicit rationing systems that are neither efficient nor equitable will prevail. Governments that make deliberate choices, and then explain and defend those choices to their constituencies, are more likely to achieve a socially desirable outcome from the large investments now being made than are those that allow queuing and queue-jumping to dominate.

Treatment of HIV/AIDS at South Africa's Largest Employers: Myth and Reality

Background: In the past three years, many large employers in South Africa have announced publicly their intention of making antiretroviral treatment (ART) available to employees. Reports of the scope and success of these programs have been mostly anecdotal. This study surveyed the largest private sector employers in South Africa to determine the proportion of employees with access to ART through employer-sponsored HIV/AIDS treatment programs. Methods: All 64 private sector and parastatal employers in South Africa with more than 6,000 employees were identified and contacted. Those that agreed to participate were interviewed by telephone using a structured questionnaire. Results: 52 companies agreed to participate. Among these companies, 63% of employees had access to employer-sponsored care and treatment for HIV/AIDS. Access varied widely by sector, however. Approximately 27% of suspected HIV-positive employees were enrolled in HIV/AIDS disease management programs, or 4.4% of the workforce overall. Fewer than 4,000 employees in the entire sample were receiving antiretroviral therapy. In-house (employer) disease management programs and independent disease management programs achieved higher uptake of services than did medical aid schemes. Conclusions: Publicity by large employers about their treatment programs should be interpreted cautiously. While there is a high level of access to treatment, uptake of services is low and only a small fraction of employees medically eligible for antiretroviral therapy are receiving it.

The Private Sector and HIV/AIDS in Africa: Taking Stock of Six Years of Applied Research

Background: Until recently, little was known about the costs of the HIV/AIDS epidemic to businesses in Africa and business responses to the epidemic. This paper synthesizes the results of a set of studies conducted between 1999 and 2006 and draws conclusions about the role of the private sector in Africa’s response to AIDS. Methods: Detailed human resource, financial, and medical data were collected from 14 large private and parastatal companies in South Africa, Uganda, Kenya, Zambia, and Ethiopia. Surveys of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) were conducted in South Africa, Kenya, and Zambia. Large companies’ responses or potential responses to the epidemic were investigated in South Africa, Uganda, Kenya, Zambia, and Rwanda. Results: Among the large companies, estimated workforce HIV prevalence ranged from 5%¬37%. The average cost per employee lost to AIDS varied from 0.5-5.6 times the average annual compensation of the employee affected. Labor cost increases as a result of AIDS were estimated at anywhere from 0.6%-10.8% but exceeded 3% at only 2 of 14 companies. Treatment of eligible employees with ART at a cost of $360/patient/year was shown to have positive financial returns for most but not all companies. Uptake of employer-provided testing and treatment services varied widely. Among SMEs, HIV prevalence in the workforce was estimated at 10%-26%. SME managers consistently reported low AIDS-related employee attrition, little concern about the impacts of AIDS on their companies, and relatively little interest in taking action, and fewer than half had ever discussed AIDS with their senior staff. AIDS was estimated to increase the average operating costs of small tourism companies in Zambia by less than 1%; labor cost increases in other sectors were probably smaller. Conclusions: Although there was wide variation among the firms studied, clear patterns emerged that will permit some prediction of impacts and responses in the future.

How Much Does It Cost to Provide Antiretroviral Therapy for HIV/AIDS in Africa?

Background: Many African countries are rapidly expanding HIV/AIDS treatment programs. Empirical information on the cost of delivering antiretroviral therapy (ART) for HIV/AIDS is needed for program planning and budgeting. Methods: We searched published and gray sources for estimates of the cost of providing ART in service delivery (non-research) settings in sub-Saharan Africa. Estimates were included if they were based on primary local data for input prices. Results: 17 eligible cost estimates were found. Of these, 10 were from South Africa. The cost per patient per year ranged from $396 to $2,761. It averaged approximately $850/patient/year in countries outside South Africa and $1,700/patient/year in South Africa. The most recent estimates for South Africa averaged $1,200/patient/year. Specific cost items included in the average cost per patient per year varied, making comparison across studies problematic. All estimates included the cost of antiretroviral drugs and laboratory tests, but many excluded the cost of inpatient care, treatment of opportunistic infections, and/or clinic infrastructure. Antiretroviral drugs comprised an average of one third of the cost of treatment in South Africa and one half to three quarters of the cost in other countries. Conclusions: There is very little empirical information available about the cost of providing antiretroviral therapy in non-research settings in Africa. Methods for estimating costs are inconsistent, and many estimates combine data drawn from disparate sources. Cost analysis should become a routine part of operational research on the treatment rollout in Africa.