MALARIA TREATMENT VS. MALARIA PROPHYLAXIS : A COST COMPARISON.

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Abstract

Aim This research aims to evaluate the cost of using drugs to combat an established infection as compared with drugs used for prophylactic purposes. And this aim was achieved by using the following objective which was: (i) To estimate the cost of using anti-malarial drugs as treatment compared to using them as prophylaxis.
Methods The study used 142 subjects (n=142) who had travelled to Liberia for six months to work among the Jordanian Level III Hospital within the United Nations Mission in Liberia (UNMIL). This is a malarious area, so the participants have to take prophylactic medicine, or they will be at risk of acquiring malaria. The prophylactic medicines that have been taken by the participants cost the RMS a particular value (Cost 1), In contrast those who acquired malaria will need treatment and hospitalization and this will incur on the RMS another different set of costs (Cost 2). A questionnaire was distributed among the participants to collect the data needed. In addition, data was collected from the records of the financial offices in the hospitals of Royal Medical Services (RMS) where the malarious patients were treated.
Results From the 142 participants, 52.1% used Mefloquine for prophylaxis in comparison with Doxycycline which was used by 29.6% of them, and the rest, 18.3%, used more than one prophylactic method. One case of malaria infection occurred during the study period and it was diagnosed as Severe Falciparum Malaria (SFM). The patient answered that he didn’t use any prophylactic medication, Cost 1 and Cost 2 evaluated and found to be £10189.00 and £1220.00 respectively.
Conclusion The study showed much less cost when using these drugs for prophylaxis by 94% per capita comparing with the cost of treating one case of Severe Falciparum Malaria (SFM).

Keywords

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics