Costing Interventions In The Field: Preliminary Cost Estimates And Lessons Learned From An Evaluation Of Community-Wide Mass Drug Administration For Elimination Of Soil-Transmitted Helminths In The Deworm3 Trial

Objective To present a costing study integrated within the DeWorm3 multi-country field trial of community-wide mass drug administration (cMDA) for elimination of soil-transmitted helminths.Design Tailored data collection instruments covering resource use, expenditure and operational details were developed for each site. These were populated alongside field activities by on-site staff. Data quality control and validation processes were established. Programmed routines were used to clean, standardise and analyse data to derive costs of cMDA and supportive activities.Setting Field site and collaborating research institutions.Primary and secondary outcome measures A strategy for costing interventions in parallel with field activities was discussed. Interim estimates of cMDA costs obtained with the strategy were presented for one of the trial sites.Results The study demonstrated that it was both feasible and advantageous to collect data alongside field activities. Practical decisions on implementing the strategy and the trade-offs involved varied by site; trialists and local partners were key to tailoring data collection to the technical and operational realities in the field. The strategy capitalised on the established processes for routine financial reporting at sites, benefitted from high recall and gathered operational insight that facilitated interpretation of the estimates derived. The methodology produced granular costs that aligned with the literature and allowed exploration of relevant scenarios. In the first year of the trial, net of drugs, the incremental financial cost of extending deworming of school-aged children to the whole community in India site averaged US$1.14 (USD, 2018) per person per round. A hypothesised at-scale routine implementation scenario yielded a much lower estimate of US$0.11 per person treated per round.Conclusions We showed that costing interventions alongside field activities offers unique opportunities for collecting rich data to inform policy toward optimising health interventions and for facilitating transfer of economic evidence from the field to the programme.