Beschreibung:
<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>Background</jats:title><jats:p>The current trend of withdrawal of donor support for <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">HIV</jats:styled-content>/<jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">AIDS</jats:styled-content> treatment in Nigeria may require that the cost of antiretroviral drugs be borne in part by infected people and their families.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Objective</jats:title><jats:p>This study was conducted to determine the economic value for free antiretroviral drugs (<jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">ARV</jats:styled-content>s) expressed by clients receiving treatment for <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">HIV</jats:styled-content>/<jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">AIDS</jats:styled-content> in a tertiary hospital.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Study method</jats:title><jats:p>The contingent valuation method was used to elicit the values attached to free <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">ARV</jats:styled-content>s from people living with <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">HIV</jats:styled-content>/<jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">AIDS</jats:styled-content> that were receiving care in a public tertiary hospital in south‐east Nigeria. Exit poll using a pre‐tested questionnaire was undertaken with adult clients on treatment. The bidding game technique was used to elicit their willingness to pay (<jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">WTP</jats:styled-content>) for ARVs for themselves and members of their households. Ordinary least squares (<jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">OLS</jats:styled-content>) multiple regression analysis was used to test the construct validity of elicited <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">WTP</jats:styled-content> amounts.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results</jats:title><jats:p>About a third of the respondents were willing to pay for a monthly supply of ARVs for themselves and household members. The mean <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">WTP</jats:styled-content> for monthly supply of ARVs for self was <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">US</jats:styled-content>$15.32 and for household member was <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">US</jats:styled-content>$15.26 (1<jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">US</jats:styled-content>$=₦160). <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">OLS</jats:styled-content> regression analysis showed that employment status and higher socio‐economic status were positively associated with higher <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">WTP</jats:styled-content>. <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">OLS</jats:styled-content> showed that age and transport cost per clinic visit were negatively related to <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">WTP</jats:styled-content>. Knowing the risks of not adhering to treatment protocol was positively related to <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">WTP</jats:styled-content>.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusion</jats:title><jats:p>The respondents positively valued the free <jats:styled-content style="fixed-case">ARV</jats:styled-content>s. This calls for greater financial support for the sustainable provision of the treatment service. However, holistic financing mechanisms should be explored to ensure sustained funding in the event of complete withdrawal of donor support.</jats:p></jats:sec>