Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2010 Dec;13(8):893-902.
doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2010.00763.x. Epub 2010 Oct 15.

Expanded HIV screening in the United States: what will it cost government discretionary and entitlement programs? A budget impact analysis

Erika G Martin  1 , A David Paltiel, Rochelle P Walensky, Bruce R Schackman
Affiliations

Expanded HIV screening in the United States: what will it cost government discretionary and entitlement programs? A budget impact analysis

Erika G Martin et al. Value Health. 2010 Dec.

Abstract

Objective: The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently revised their HIV screening guidelines to promote testing and earlier entry to care. Prior analyses have examined the policy's cost-effectiveness but have not evaluated its impact on government budgets.

Methods: We used a simulation model of HIV screening, disease, and treatment to determine the budget impact of expanded HIV screening to US government discretionary, entitlement, and testing programs. We estimated total and incremental testing and treatment costs over a 5-year time horizon under current and expanded screening scenarios. We used CDC estimates of HIV prevalence and annual incidence, and considered variations in screening frequency, test return rates, linkage to care, test characteristics, and eligibility for government screening and treatment programs.

Results: Under current practice, 177,000 new HIV cases will be identified over 5 years. Expanded screening will identify an additional 46,000 cases at an incremental 5-year cost of $2.7 billion. The financial burden of expanded HIV screening will fall disproportionately on discretionary programs that fund care for newly identified patients and will not be offset by entitlement program savings. Testing will represent a small proportion (18%) of the total budget increase. Costs are sensitive to the frequency of screening and the proportion linked to care.

Conclusions: The expanded HIV screening program will have a large downstream impact on government programs that fund HIV care. Expanded HIV screening will not meet early treatment goals unless government programs have sufficient budgets to expand testing and provide care for newly identified cases.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Incremental costs (in millions) to US government testing, discretionary, and entitlement programs, comparing current practice and expanded screening, 2009-2013.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Projected pharmaceutical costs (in millions) to US discretionary programs under current practice and expanded screening, 2009-2013, compared to current ADAP budget.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Assignment of HIV screening costs for budget impact analysis.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Freedberg K, Losina E, Weinstein M, et al. The cost effectiveness of combination antiretroviral therapy for HIV disease. N Engl J Med. 2001;344:824–31. - PubMed
    1. Freedberg K, Scharstein J, Seage G, III, et al. The cost-effectiveness of preventing AIDS-related opportunistic infections. JAMA. 1998;279:130–36. - PubMed
    1. Paltiel A, Weinstein M, Kimmel A, et al. Expanded screening in the United States -- an analysis of cost-effectiveness. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:586–95. - PubMed
    1. Walensky R, Paltiel A, Losina E, et al. The survival benefits of AIDS treatment in the United States. J Infect Dis. 2006:194. - PubMed
    1. Weinstein M, Goldie S, Losina E, et al. Use of genotype resistance testing to guide HIV therapy: clinical impact and cost-effectiveness. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134:440–50. - PubMed

Publication types