Estimating the budget impact of adopting tenofovir/emtricitabine for pre-exposure prophylaxis of HIV in the public health sector in Namibia (2021 - 2023)

• Main Authors: Enos Moyo (Author), Leela Barham (Author), Malizgani Mhango (Author), Godfrey Musuka (Author), Tafadzwa Dzinamarira (Author)
• Format: Book
• Published: Elsevier, 2022-10-01T00:00:00Z.
• Subjects: article
• Online Access: Connect to this object online.
• Notes: 1876-0341; 10.1016/j.jiph.2022.09.003
• Keywords: Budget impact analysis; HIV; PrEP; Namibia; Tenofovir/emtricitabine; Infectious and parasitic diseases; RC109-216; Public aspects of medicine; RA1-1270
• Source: Journal of Infection and Public Health, Vol 15, Iss 10, Pp 1147-1155 (2022)

Background: Although Namibia started implementing pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) in 2016, no study to determine its budget impact has been conducted. This study, therefore, aimed to estimate the budget impact of adopting tenofovir/emtricitabine for PrEP of HIV for all eligible people in the public health sector in Namibia from 2021 to 2023. Methods: A country-specific model was developed for this budget impact analysis (BIA). PrEP has targeted all eligible people in Namibia who receive health services from the public sector. It was assumed that the adherence rate was 75% and PrEP effectiveness 60% in this study. Costs used in this study were taken from a study that included Namibian costs. Results: The BIA suggests that adopting PrEP may be cost saving as US$104 823, US$143 620, and US$182 452 of additional HIV care costs will potentially be saved in 2021, 2022, and 2023, respectively. Cost savings rely on high adherence rates, high PrEP effectiveness rates, low PrEP costs, and a small number of people living with HIV (PLHIV). Conclusion: Further economic analysis could aid decision-making in Namibia, both to stress test assumptions in the BIA and conduct cost-effectiveness analysis to estimate the value for money of PrEP.