Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

SummaryObjective To explore the cost‐effectiveness of artesunate against quinine based principally on the findings of a large multi‐centre trial carried out in Southeast Asia.Methods Trial data were used to compare mortality of patients with severe malaria, treated with either artesunate or quinine. This was combined with retrospectively collected cost data to estimate the incremental cost per death averted with the use of artesunate instead of quinine.Results The incremental cost per death averted using artesunate was approximately 140 USD. Artesunate maintained this high level of cost‐effectiveness also when allowing for the uncertainty surrounding the cost and effectiveness assessments.Conclusion This analysis confirms the vast superiority of artesunate for treatment of severe malaria from an economic as well as a clinical perspective.

More information Original publication

DOI

10.1111/j.1365-3156.2009.02227.x

Type

Journal article

Publisher

Wiley

Publication Date

2009-03-01T00:00:00+00:00

Volume

14

Pages

332 - 337

Total pages

5