# Table 4 Treatment outcome and cost-effectiveness (CE) for each model of treatment provision in 2001 US\$*

Treatment outcome** PWP model PNP model Purely public model
Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5 Site 6
N = 95 N = 423 N = 355 N = 50 N = 85 N = 174
Successfully treated 83 (87%) 368 (87%) 283 (80%) 41 (82%) 76 (89%) 129 (74%)
Cured†† 79 (83%) 321 (76%) 231 (65%) 41 (82%) 74 (87%) 121 (69%)
Failed 1 (1%) 4 (1%) 3 (1%) 1 (2%) 0 1 (1%)
Died‡‡ 11 (12%) 47 (12%) 13 (4%) 4 (8%) 1 (1%) 4 (2%)
Interrupted§ - - 56 (15%) 4 (8%) 8 (10%) 40 (23%)
CE from the provider perspective
Total cost of treating patient 654 744 251 253 507 568
Treatment success rate§§ 87 87 80 82 89 74
Cure rate 83 76 65 82 87 69
Cost per new smear-positive patient successfully treated 752 855 314 308 570 767
Cost per new smear-positive patient cured 788 979 386 308 583 823
CE from the patient perspective
Total cost of treating patient N.A. N.A. 39 37 102 122
Treatment success rate    80 82 89 74
Cure rate    65 82 87 69
Cost per new smear-positive patient successfully treated    49 45 115 165
Cost per new smear-positive patient cured    60 45 117 177
CE from the societal perspective
Total cost of treating patient 654 744 290 290 609 690
Treatment success rate 87 87 80 82 89 74
Cure rate 83 76 65 82 87 69
Cost per new smear-positive patient successfully treated 752 855 362 354 684 932
Cost per new smear-positive patient cured 788 979 446 354 700 1 000
1. * Cost data from 2001. Average exchange rate prevailing in 2001 US\$1 = R8.57.
2. ** Source: Reports submitted to the provincial TB programmes.
3. The sum of those patients who were cured plus those who completed treatment but without laboratory proof of cure.
4. †† Patients who were smear negative at the end of treatment.
5. Patients who remained or become again smear-positive at 5 months or later during treatment. Patients who were 'transferred out' are not included in the denominator (to be in line with international and national reporting requirements, this category of TB patients will in future be included in the denominator of the reporting district where they were initially registered). The number of patients who were 'transferred out': 1 (site 1), 4 (site 2), 31 (site 3), 9 (site 4), 16 (site 5) and 35 (site 6).
6. ‡‡ Patients who died for any reason during the course of TB treatment.
7. § Patients whose treatment was interrupted for 2 months or more.
8. §§ Estimated as a ratio between the number of new smear-positive patients registered and the number of new smear-positive patients successfully treated.
9. Estimated as a ratio between the number of new smear-positive patients registered and the number of new smear-positive patients cured.
10. This represents a sum of provider and patient costs for each site.