↓ Skip to main content

The "ComPAS Trial" combined treatment model for acute malnutrition: study protocol for the economic evaluation

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
102 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The "ComPAS Trial" combined treatment model for acute malnutrition: study protocol for the economic evaluation
Published in
Trials, April 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13063-018-2594-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Natasha Lelijveld, Jeanette Bailey, Amy Mayberry, Lani Trenouth, Dieynaba S. N’Diaye, Hassan Haghparast-Bidgoli, Chloe Puett

Abstract

Acute malnutrition is currently divided into severe (SAM) and moderate (MAM) based on level of wasting. SAM and MAM currently have separate treatment protocols and products, managed by separate international agencies. For SAM, the dose of treatment is allocated by the child's weight. A combined and simplified protocol for SAM and MAM, with a standardised dose of ready-to-use therapeutic food (RUTF), is being trialled for non-inferior recovery rates and may be more cost-effective than the current standard protocols for treating SAM and MAM. This is the protocol for the economic evaluation of the ComPAS trial, a cluster-randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial that compares a novel combined protocol for treating uncomplicated acute malnutrition compared to the current standard protocol in South Sudan and Kenya. We will calculate the total economic costs of both protocols from a societal perspective, using accounting data, interviews and survey questionnaires. The incremental cost of implementing the combined protocol will be estimated, and all costs and outcomes will be presented as a cost-consequence analysis. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio will be calculated for primary and secondary outcome, if statistically significant. We hypothesise that implementing the combined protocol will be cost-effective due to streamlined logistics at clinic level, reduced length of treatment, especially for MAM, and reduced dosages of RUTF. The findings of this economic evaluation will be important for policymakers, especially given the hypothesised non-inferiority of the main health outcomes. The publication of this protocol aims to improve rigour of conduct and transparency of data collection and analysis. It is also intended to promote inclusion of economic evaluation in other nutrition intervention studies, especially for MAM, and improve comparability with other studies. ISRCTN 30393230 , date: 16/03/2017.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 102 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 17%
Student > Master 15 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 11%
Student > Bachelor 11 11%
Unspecified 3 3%
Other 13 13%
Unknown 32 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 14 14%
Social Sciences 9 9%
Business, Management and Accounting 4 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 4%
Other 20 20%
Unknown 36 35%