Optimizing Resource Allocation in United States AIDS Drug Assistance Programs
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Background: US acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) Drug Assistance programs (ADAPs) provide medications to low-income patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection/AIDS. Nationally, ADAPs are in a fiscal crisis. Many states have instituted waiting lists, often serving clients on a first-come, first-served basis. We hypothesized that CD4 cell count-based ADAP eligibility would improve ADAP outcomes, allowing them to serve more-diverse patient populations and to prioritize persons who are at greatest risk of HIV-related mortality.
Methods: We used Massachusetts ADAP administrative data to create a retrospective cohort of Massachusetts ADAP clients from fiscal year 2003. We then used a model-based analysis to apply potential eligibility criteria for a limited program and to compare characteristics of patients included under CD4 cell count-based and first-come, first-served eligibility criteria.
Results: In fiscal year 2003, Massachusetts ADAPs served 3560 clients at a direct cost of 10.3 million dollars. With use of CD4 cell count-based eligibility (with an eligibility criterion of a current or nadir CD4 cell count < or = 350 cells/microL), it would have served 2253 clients (37% fewer than in fiscal year 2003) and appreciated savings of 2.7 million dollars. Given the same budget constraint and using first-come, first-served eligibility, Massachusetts ADAPs would have served 2406 clients (32% fewer than in fiscal year 2003). The first-come, first-served approach would have excluded patients with median CD4 cell count of 257 cells/microL (interquartile range, 124-377 cells/microL) in favor of serving patients with median CD4 cell count of 659 cells/microL (interquartile range, 511-841 cells/microL). In addition, a CD4 cell count-based scheme would have served a greater proportion of nonwhite individuals (65% vs. 55%; P<.0001), non-English speakers (24% vs. 19%; P=.03), and unemployed people (69% vs. 61%; P=.0009), compared with the population that would have been served by a first-come, first-served policy.
Conclusions: With limited resources, ADAPs will serve more-diverse populations and patients with significantly more advanced HIV disease by using CD4 cell count-based enrollment criteria rather than a first-come, first-served approach.
Sprague C, Simon S Int J Equity Health. 2014; 13:28.
PMID: 24708752 PMC: 3983673. DOI: 10.1186/1475-9276-13-28.
Hanna D, Buchacz K, Gebo K, Hessol N, Horberg M, Jacobson L PLoS One. 2013; 8(11):e78952.
PMID: 24260137 PMC: 3832515. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0078952.
McManus K, Engelhard C, Dillingham R AIDS Res Treat. 2013; 2013:350169.
PMID: 23573418 PMC: 3614023. DOI: 10.1155/2013/350169.
Marconi V, Grandits G, Weintrob A, Chun H, Landrum M, Ganesan A AIDS Res Ther. 2010; 7:14.
PMID: 20507622 PMC: 2894737. DOI: 10.1186/1742-6405-7-14.
Improving outcomes in state AIDS drug assistance programs.
Linas B, Losina E, Rockwell A, Walensky R, Cranston K, Freedberg K J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr. 2009; 51(5):513-21.
PMID: 19561518 PMC: 2774843. DOI: 10.1097/QAI.0b013e3181b16d00.