Examining the cost-effectiveness of personal protective equipment for formal healthcare workers in Kenya during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Healthcare workers are at a higher risk of COVID-19 infection during care encounters compared to the general population. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) have been shown to protect COVID-19 among healthcare workers, however, Kenya has faced PPE shortages that can adequately protect all healthcare workers. We, therefore, examined the health and economic consequences of investing in PPE for healthcare workers in Kenya.

METHODS

We conducted a cost-effectiveness and return on investment (ROI) analysis using a decision-analytic model following the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) guidelines. We examined two outcomes: 1) the incremental cost per healthcare worker death averted, and 2) the incremental cost per healthcare worker COVID-19 case averted. We performed a multivariate sensitivity analysis using 10,000 Monte Carlo simulations.

RESULTS

Kenya would need to invest $3.12 million (95% CI: 2.65-3.59) to adequately protect healthcare workers against COVID-19. This investment would avert 416 (IQR: 330-517) and 30,041 (IQR: 7243 - 102,480) healthcare worker deaths and COVID-19 cases respectively. Additionally, such an investment would result in a healthcare system ROI of $170.64 million (IQR: 138-209) - equivalent to an 11.04 times return.

CONCLUSION

Despite other nationwide COVID-19 prevention measures such as social distancing, over 70% of healthcare workers will still be infected if the availability of PPE remains scarce. As part of the COVID-19 response strategy, the government should consider adequate investment in PPE for all healthcare workers in the country as it provides a large return on investment and it is value for money.

Migrant encounters in the clinic: Bureaucratic, biomedical, and community influences on patient interactions with front-line workers

Ethnographic research on the clinical encounter has focused almost exclusively on what happens in exam rooms-particularly patient-provider interactions-leaving much to be understood about other actors within the clinic. As part of a larger ethnographic study examining the impact of colonialism, transnational migration, discrimination, and gender relations on Chuukese migrant women's reproductive and sexual health outcomes in Guam, I conducted eight months of participant observation in three publicly funded health clinics, 24 interviews with health care workers, and 15 life-history interviews with Chuukese women between September 2012 and February 2014. Findings demonstrated differential treatment of Chuukese patients by front-line workers (FLWs), who engaged in "boundary work" with these patients. Further, care varied by clinic space and the actors in that space. This differential treatment and variation in care impacted Chuukese women's access to and experiences with health care in Guam. Utilizing the concept of "deservingness," this analysis unpacks how FLWs, like Lipsky's "street-level bureaucrats," are influenced by bureaucratic, biomedical, and community hierarchies, all contributing to differential patient treatment. This study concludes by calling for more integrated analyses of clinical environments which utilize Lipsky's concept to include community narratives of "deservingness" and incorporate the influence of clinic and community stratification.