Table 3.
Effectiveness and cost outcomes for four study arms.
| Control | Aquatabs | P&G PoW | Ceramic Filter | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Recovery rate | 53.1% | 75.2%a | 69.7%a | 70.7%a |
| Defaulted | 12.7% | 5.0% | 7.3% | 7.8% |
| Died | 0.5% | 0.5% | 0.9% | 2.0% |
| Non-recovered | 33.0% | 19.4% | 22.0% | 19.5% |
| # children treated | 213 | 222 | 218 | 205 |
| # children recovered | 113 | 167 | 152 | 145 |
| Cost of the combined interventions: SAM treatment + PoU water treatment | 54,464 | 53,088 | 63,182 | 75,636 |
| Cost per child treated (USD) | 256 | 239 | 290 | 369 |
| Cost per child recovered (USD) | 482 | 318 | 416 | 522 |
| Cost of the PoU water treatment component alone (USD) | 18,750 | 20,725 | 24,573 | 41,637 |
| Cost of the PoU water treatment per child treated (USD) | 88 | 93 | 113 | 203 |
| Cost of the PoU water treatment per child recovered (USD) | 166 | 124 | 162 | 287 |
Note: aAll three intervention arms had significantly higher recovery rates compared to the control arm [30].