JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
    View Item 
    •   OpenBU
    • School of Public Health
    • Department of Global Health
    • SPH Health & Development Paper Series
    • View Item
    •   OpenBU
    • School of Public Health
    • Department of Global Health
    • SPH Health & Development Paper Series
    • View Item

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

    Thumbnail
    Download/View
    HDDP4-Rationin...pdf (216.9Kb)
    Date Issued
    2010-01-28
    Author
    Rosen, Sydney
    Sanne, Ian
    Collier, Alizanne
    Simon, Jonathon L.
    Share to FacebookShare to TwitterShare by Email
    Export Citation
    Download to BibTex
    Download to EndNote/RefMan (RIS)
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Permanent Link
    http://sph.bu.edu/cihd/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=381&Itemid=617095
    https://hdl.handle.net/2144/1298
    Abstract
    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.
    Collections
    • SPH Health & Development Paper Series [11]

    Contact Us | Send Feedback | Help
     

     

    Browse

    All of OpenBUCommunities & CollectionsIssue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsThis CollectionIssue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjects

    Deposit Materials

    LoginNon-BU Registration

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    Contact Us | Send Feedback | Help