Aid and the control of tuberculosis in Papua New Guinea: Is Australia's assistance cost-effective?

Australia supports the control of tuberculosis in Papua New Guinea for reasons of aid effectiveness and a desire to decrease the chance of importing tuberculosis to Australia. This paper analyses the case for this support using both cost-utility and cost-benefit analysis. We reach three conclusions....

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inAsia & the Pacific policy studies Vol. 1; no. 2; pp. 364 - 378
Main Authors Hoa-Thi-Minh Nguyen, Tom Kompas, Roslyn I Hickson
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Wiley 01.05.2014
Subjects
aid
Cost effectiveness
Directly Observed Therapy (Program)
DOTS
Finance
Investments
Papua New Guinea
Prevention
Public health
Social aspects
Tuberculosis
PAPUA NEW GUINEA
AUSTRALIA
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:Australia supports the control of tuberculosis in Papua New Guinea for reasons of aid effectiveness and a desire to decrease the chance of importing tuberculosis to Australia. This paper analyses the case for this support using both cost-utility and cost-benefit analysis. We reach three conclusions. First, Australia directly benefits from its investment in controlling tuberculosis in Papua New Guinea, with a cost of $US 13 million (in 2012 prices) over 10 years earning a net present value of $US 22 million. Second, the longer and more extensive the basic directly observed short course therapy, or basic DOTS, to control tuberculosis, the higher are the returns for Australia. Finally, in addition to surpassing all commonly used benchmarks for being a costeffective investment for Australia, a basic DOTS expansion also generates a health benefit for Papua New Guinea that compares well as one of the 'ten best health buys' in developing countries.
Bibliography:Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies, Vol. 1, No. 2, May 2014, [364]-378
Informit, Melbourne (Vic)
ISSN:2050-2680
2050-2680
DOI:10.1002/app5.37