Objectives: To estimate the number of HIV-positive births currently prevented by contraceptive use in the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) focus countries and to estimate the first year cost savings to each country if unintended and unwanted HIV-positive births were prevented via contraceptive use rather than providing antiretroviral prophylaxis for HIV-positive pregnant women (“PMTCT services”).
Methods: Data from publicly available sources yielded estimates of (1) contraceptive and HIV prevalence; (2) the number of women of reproductive age; (3) the number of annual births to HIV-infected women; (4) the rates of pregnancy and vertical HIV transmission; (5) the proportions of unintended and unwanted births; and (6) the cost per HIV-positive birth averted by family planning and PMTCT services. The number of HIV-positive births currently averted by contraceptive use and the number of unwanted and unintended HIV-positive births are the product of these estimates. Cost savings are the difference in the costs of family planning and PMTCT services.
Results: The annual number of unintended HIV-positive births currently averted by contraceptive use ranges from 178 in Guyana to over 120 000 in South Africa. The minimum annual cost savings to prevent just the unwanted HIV-positive births ranges from $26 000 in Vietnam to over $2.2 million in South Africa.
Conclusions: Contraception is already having an important effect on reducing the number of infant HIV infections. This contribution could be strengthened by additional efforts to provide contraception to HIV-infected women who do not wish to become pregnant. Moreover, the effect of contraception can be achieved at a cost savings compared with PMTCT services.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Funding: Support for this study was provided by Family Health International (FHI) with funds from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), Cooperative Agreement Number GPO-A-00-05-00022-00, although the views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of FHI or USAID. The funding agency had no involvement in study design, in data analysis or interpretation, in writing the report or in the decision to submit the paper.
Competing interests: None.
Contributions: HWR led the study conception, design, analysis and interpretation of data and took primary responsibility for drafting and revising the manuscript. BJ collaborated on the study design, analysis and interpretation of data and participated in reviewing and revising the manuscript. RW collaborated on the interpretation of data and participated in reviewing and revising the manuscript. WC collaborated on study conception, design and interpretation of data and participated in reviewing and revising the manuscript. All co-authors approved this version of the manuscript.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.