Tijs Van Iseghem, Laura Vroonen, Emilie Op de Beeck, Annick Meertens, Caroline Masquillier, Edwin Wouters, Nick Verhaeghe
{"title":"The cost-effectiveness of community health workers in primary health care: a systematic review.","authors":"Tijs Van Iseghem, Laura Vroonen, Emilie Op de Beeck, Annick Meertens, Caroline Masquillier, Edwin Wouters, Nick Verhaeghe","doi":"10.1016/j.jval.2025.09.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Global interest in community health worker (CHW) programs in primary health care (PHC) is rising due to their potential to advance universal health coverage and other global health goals. This systematic review examines the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of CHW interventions worldwide, with a focus on vulnerable populations in PHC settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review was conducted using the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, SCOPUS and EconLit databases. The search was last updated on May 13, 2025. Two reviewers independently selected articles, rated their quality and extracted relevant data. Included articles had to be full economic evaluations comparing CHW interventions to usual care without CHWs, focussing on vulnerable populations in PHC. A standardized data extraction template was used and the reporting quality was assessed using the CHEERS checklist.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty articles were included, originating from 25 countries. All but one of the economic evaluations were disease-specific, focusing mainly on maternal, newborn and child health, type 2 diabetes mellitus, tuberculosis, cardiovascular disease, mental health, and HIV. Most articles (n = 35, 70%) indicated that CHW interventions were (potentially) cost-effective. Fourteen out of these 35 articles can substantiate their findings with a probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This review found that CHWs can be cost-effective across multiple health domains, both in LMICs and HICs. The lack of PSA, together with heterogeneity in contexts, interventions and methods used to assess the cost-effectiveness of the CHW interventions makes it difficult to draw general conclusions about the value-for-money of CHWs in PHC.</p>","PeriodicalId":23508,"journal":{"name":"Value in Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2025.09.004","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Global interest in community health worker (CHW) programs in primary health care (PHC) is rising due to their potential to advance universal health coverage and other global health goals. This systematic review examines the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of CHW interventions worldwide, with a focus on vulnerable populations in PHC settings.
Methods: A systematic review was conducted using the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, SCOPUS and EconLit databases. The search was last updated on May 13, 2025. Two reviewers independently selected articles, rated their quality and extracted relevant data. Included articles had to be full economic evaluations comparing CHW interventions to usual care without CHWs, focussing on vulnerable populations in PHC. A standardized data extraction template was used and the reporting quality was assessed using the CHEERS checklist.
Results: Fifty articles were included, originating from 25 countries. All but one of the economic evaluations were disease-specific, focusing mainly on maternal, newborn and child health, type 2 diabetes mellitus, tuberculosis, cardiovascular disease, mental health, and HIV. Most articles (n = 35, 70%) indicated that CHW interventions were (potentially) cost-effective. Fourteen out of these 35 articles can substantiate their findings with a probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA).
Conclusion: This review found that CHWs can be cost-effective across multiple health domains, both in LMICs and HICs. The lack of PSA, together with heterogeneity in contexts, interventions and methods used to assess the cost-effectiveness of the CHW interventions makes it difficult to draw general conclusions about the value-for-money of CHWs in PHC.
期刊介绍:
Value in Health contains original research articles for pharmacoeconomics, health economics, and outcomes research (clinical, economic, and patient-reported outcomes/preference-based research), as well as conceptual and health policy articles that provide valuable information for health care decision-makers as well as the research community. As the official journal of ISPOR, Value in Health provides a forum for researchers, as well as health care decision-makers to translate outcomes research into health care decisions.