Dataset Information

Seasonal influenza vaccination for children in Thailand: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Seasonal influenza is a major cause of mortality worldwide. Routine immunization of children has the potential to reduce this mortality through both direct and indirect protection, but has not been adopted by any low- or middle-income countries. We developed a framework to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of influenza vaccination policies in developing countries and used it to consider annual vaccination of school- and preschool-aged children with either trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) or trivalent live-attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) in Thailand. We also compared these approaches with a policy of expanding TIV coverage in the elderly.

Methods and findings

We developed an age-structured model to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of eight vaccination policies parameterized using country-level data from Thailand. For policies using LAIV, we considered five different age groups of children to vaccinate. We adopted a Bayesian evidence-synthesis framework, expressing uncertainty in parameters through probability distributions derived by fitting the model to prospectively collected laboratory-confirmed influenza data from 2005-2009, by meta-analysis of clinical trial data, and by using prior probability distributions derived from literature review and elicitation of expert opinion. We performed sensitivity analyses using alternative assumptions about prior immunity, contact patterns between age groups, the proportion of infections that are symptomatic, cost per unit vaccine, and vaccine effectiveness. Vaccination of children with LAIV was found to be highly cost-effective, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios between about 2,000 and 5,000 international dollars per disability-adjusted life year averted, and was consistently preferred to TIV-based policies. These findings were robust to extensive sensitivity analyses. The optimal age group to vaccinate with LAIV, however, was sensitive both to the willingness to pay for health benefits and to assumptions about contact patterns between age groups.

Conclusions

Vaccinating school-aged children with LAIV is likely to be cost-effective in Thailand in the short term, though the long-term consequences of such a policy cannot be reliably predicted given current knowledge of influenza epidemiology and immunology. Our work provides a coherent framework that can be used for similar analyses in other low- and middle-income countries.

SUBMITTER: Meeyai A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4444096 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundChina has a high burden of influenza-associated illness among children. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of introducing government-funded influenza vaccination to children in China (fully-funded policy) compared with the status quo (self-paid policy).MethodsA decision tree model was developed to calculate the economic and health outcomes, from a societal perspective, using national- and provincial-level data. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) [incremental costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained] was used to compare the fully-funded policy with the self-paid policy under the willingness-to-pay threshold equivalent to national and provincial GDP per capita. Sensitivity analyses were performed and various scenarios were explored based on real-world conditions, including incorporating indirect effect into the analysis.ResultsCompared to the self-paid policy, implementation of a fully-funded policy could prevent 1,444,768 [95% uncertainty range (UR): 1,203,446-1,719,761] symptomatic cases, 92,110 (95% UR: 66,953-122,226) influenza-related hospitalizations, and 6494 (95% UR: 4590-8962) influenza-related death per season. The fully-funded policy was cost-effective nationally (7964 USD per QALY gained) and provincially for 13 of 31 provincial-level administrative divisions (PLADs). The probability of a funded vaccination policy being cost-effective was 56.5% nationally, and the probability in 9 of 31 PLADs was above 75%. The result was most sensitive to the symptomatic influenza rate among children under 5 years [ICER ranging from - 25,612 (cost-saving) to 14,532 USD per QALY gained]. The ICER of the fully-funded policy was substantially lower (becoming cost-saving) if the indirect effects of vaccination were considered.ConclusionsIntroducing a government-funded influenza policy for children is cost-effective in China nationally and in many PLADs. PLADs with high symptomatic influenza rate and influenza-associated mortality would benefit the most from a government-funded influenza vaccination program.

Project description:BackgroundSeasonal influenza imposes a significant health and economic burden in South Africa, particularly in populations vulnerable to severe consequences of influenza. This study assesses the cost-effectiveness of South Africa's seasonal influenza vaccination strategy, which involves vaccinating vulnerable populations with trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) during routine facility visits. Vulnerable populations included in our analysis are persons aged ≥ 65 years; pregnant women; persons living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA), persons of any age with underlying medical conditions (UMC) and children aged 6-59 months.MethodWe employed the World Health Organisation's (WHO) Cost Effectiveness Tool for Seasonal Influenza Vaccination (CETSIV), a decision tree model, to evaluate the 2018 seasonal influenza vaccination campaign from a public healthcare provider and societal perspective. CETSIV was populated with existing country-specific demographic, epidemiologic and coverage data to estimate incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) by comparing costs and benefits of the influenza vaccination programme to no vaccination.ResultsThe highest number of clinical events (influenza cases, outpatient visits, hospitalisation and deaths) were averted in PLWHA and persons with other UMCs. Using a cost-effectiveness threshold of US$ 3400 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), our findings suggest that the vaccination programme is cost-effective for all vulnerable populations except for children aged 6-59 months. ICERs ranged from ~US$ 1 750 /QALY in PLWHA to ~US$ 7500/QALY in children. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the vaccination programme was cost-effective in pregnant women, PLWHA, persons with UMCs and persons aged ≥65 years in >80% of simulations. These findings were robust to changes in many model inputs but were most sensitive to uncertainty in estimates of influenza-associated illness burden.ConclusionSouth Africa's seasonal influenza vaccination strategy of opportunistically targeting vulnerable populations during routine visits is cost-effective. A budget impact analysis will be useful for supporting future expansions of the programme.

Project description:In advance of a large influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) cohort study among older adults in Thailand, we conducted a population-based, cross-sectional survey to measure vaccine coverage and identify factors associated with influenza vaccination among older Thai adults that could bias measures of vaccine effectiveness.We selected adults ?65 years using a two-stage, stratified, cluster sampling design. Functional status was assessed using the 10-point Vulnerable Elders Survey (VES); scores ?3 indicated vulnerability. Questions about attitudes towards vaccination were based on the Health Belief Model. The distance between participants' households and the nearest vaccination clinic was calculated. Vaccination status was determined using national influenza vaccination registry. Prevalence ratios (PR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using log-binomial multivariable models accounting for the sampling design.We enrolled 581 participants, of whom 60% were female, median age was 72 years, 41% had at least one chronic underlying illness, 24% met the criteria for vulnerable, and 23% did not leave the house on a daily basis. Influenza vaccination rate was 34%. In multivariable models, no variable related to functional status was associated with vaccination. The strongest predictors of vaccination were distance to the nearest vaccination center (PR 3.0, 95% CI 1.7-5.1 for participants in the closest quartile compared to the furthest), and high levels of a perception of benefits of influenza vaccination (PR 2.8, 95% CI 1.4-5.6) and cues to action (PR 2.7, 95% CI 1.5-5.1).Distance to vaccination clinics should be considered in analyses of influenza VE studies in Thailand. Strategies that emphasize benefits of vaccination and encourage physicians to recommend annual influenza vaccination could improve influenza vaccine uptake among older Thai adults. Outreach to more distant and less mobile older adults may also be required to improve influenza vaccination coverage.

Project description:BackgroundStudies have noted variations in the cost-effectiveness of school-located influenza vaccination (SLIV), but little is known about how SLIV's cost-effectiveness may vary by targeted age group (e.g., elementary or secondary school students), or vaccine consent process (paper-based or web-based). Further, SLIV's cost-effectiveness may be impacted by its spillover effect on practice-based vaccination; prior studies have not addressed this issue.MethodsWe performed a cost-effectiveness analysis on two SLIV programs in upstate New York in 2015-2016: (a) elementary school SLIV using a stepped wedge design with schools as clusters (24 suburban and 18 urban schools) and (b) secondary school SLIV using a cluster randomized trial (16 suburban and 4 urban schools). The cost-per-additionally-vaccinated child (i.e., incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER)) was estimated by dividing the incremental SLIV intervention cost by the incremental effectiveness (i.e., the additional number of vaccinated students in intervention schools compared to control schools). We performed deterministic analyses, one-way sensitivity analyses, and probabilistic analyses.ResultsThe overall effectiveness measure (proportion of children vaccinated) was 5.7 and 5.5 percentage points higher, respectively, in intervention elementary (52.8%) and secondary schools (48.2%) than grade-matched control schools. SLIV programs vaccinated a small proportion of children in intervention elementary (5.2%) and secondary schools (2.5%). In elementary and secondary schools, the ICER excluding vaccine purchase was $85.71 and $86.51 per-additionally-vaccinated-child, respectively. When additionally accounting for observed spillover impact on practice-based vaccination, the ICER decreased to $80.53 in elementary schools -- decreasing substantially in secondary schools. (to $53.40). These estimates were higher than the published practice-based vaccination cost (median = $25.50, mean = $45.48). Also, these estimates were higher than our 2009-2011 urban SLIV program mean costs ($65) due to additional costs for use of a new web-based consent system ($12.97 per-additionally-vaccinated-child) and higher project coordination costs in 2015-2016. One-way sensitivity analyses showed that ICER estimates were most sensitive to the SLIV effectiveness.ConclusionsSLIV raises vaccination rates and may increase practice-based vaccination in primary care practices. While these SLIV programs are effective, to be as cost-effective as practice-based vaccination our SLIV programs would need to vaccinate more students and/or lower the costs for consent systems and project coordination.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02227186 (August 25, 2014), updated NCT03137667 (May 2, 2017).

Project description:BackgroundChina has an aging population with an increasing number of adults aged ??60?years. Influenza causes a heavy disease burden in older adults, but can be alleviated by vaccination. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of a potential government-funded seasonal influenza vaccination program in older adults in China.MethodsWe characterized the health and economic impact of a fully funded influenza vaccination program for older adults using China-specific influenza disease burden, and related cost data, etc. Using a decision tree model, we calculated the incremental costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained of vaccination from the societal perspective, at a willingness-to-pay threshold equivalent to GDP per capita (US$8840). Moreover, we estimated the threshold vaccination costs, under which the fully funded vaccination program is cost-effective using GDP per capita as the willingness-to-pay threshold.ResultsCompared to current self-paid vaccination, a fully funded vaccination program is expected to prevent 19,812 (95% uncertainty interval, 7150-35,783) influenza-like-illness outpatient consultations per year, 9418 (3386-17,068) severe acute respiratory infection hospitalizations per year, and 8800 (5300-11,667) respiratory excess deaths due to influenza per year, and gain 70,212 (42,106-93,635) QALYs per year. Nationally, the incremental costs per QALY gained of the vaccination program is US$4832 (3460-8307), with a 98% probability of being cost-effective. The threshold vaccination cost is US$10.19 (6.08-13.65). However, variations exist between geographical regions, with Northeast and Central China having lower probabilities of cost-effectiveness.ConclusionsOur results support the implementation of a government fully funded older adult vaccination program in China. The regional analysis provides results across settings that may be relevant to other countries with similar disease burden and economic status, especially for low- and middle-income countries where such analysis is limited.

Project description:BACKGROUND: A critical issue in planning pandemic influenza mitigation strategies is the delay between the arrival of the pandemic in a community and the availability of an effective vaccine. The likely scenario, born out in the 2009 pandemic, is that a newly emerged influenza pandemic will have spread to most parts of the world before a vaccine matched to the pandemic strain is produced. For a severe pandemic, additional rapidly activated intervention measures will be required if high mortality rates are to be avoided. METHODS: A simulation modelling study was conducted to examine the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of plausible combinations of social distancing, antiviral and vaccination interventions, assuming a delay of 6-months between arrival of an influenza pandemic and first availability of a vaccine. Three different pandemic scenarios were examined; mild, moderate and extreme, based on estimates of transmissibility and pathogenicity of the 2009, 1957 and 1918 influenza pandemics respectively. A range of different durations of social distancing were examined, and the sensitivity of the results to variation in the vaccination delay, ranging from 2 to 6 months, was analysed. RESULTS: Vaccination-only strategies were not cost effective for any pandemic scenario, saving few lives and incurring substantial vaccination costs. Vaccination coupled with long duration social distancing, antiviral treatment and antiviral prophylaxis was cost effective for moderate pandemics and extreme pandemics, where it saved lives while simultaneously reducing the total pandemic cost. Combined social distancing and antiviral interventions without vaccination were significantly less effective, since without vaccination a resurgence in case numbers occurred as soon as social distancing interventions were relaxed. When social distancing interventions were continued until at least the start of the vaccination campaign, attack rates and total costs were significantly lower, and increased rates of vaccination further improved effectiveness and cost effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness and cost effectiveness consequences of the time-critical interplay of pandemic dynamics, vaccine availability and intervention timing has been quantified. For moderate and extreme pandemics, vaccination combined with rapidly activated antiviral and social distancing interventions of sufficient duration is cost effective from the perspective of life years saved.

Project description:BackgroundA vaccine matched to a newly emerged pandemic influenza virus would require a production time of at least 6 months with current proven techniques, and so could only be used reactively after the peak of the pandemic. A pre-pandemic vaccine, although probably having lower efficacy, could be produced and used pre-emptively. While several previous studies have investigated the cost effectiveness of pre-emptive vaccination strategies, they have not been directly compared to realistic reactive vaccination strategies.MethodsAn individual-based simulation model of ~30,000 people was used to examine a pre-emptive vaccination strategy, assuming vaccination conducted prior to a pandemic using a low-efficacy vaccine. A reactive vaccination strategy, assuming a 6-month delay between pandemic emergence and availability of a high-efficacy vaccine, was also modelled. Social distancing and antiviral interventions were examined in combination with these alternative vaccination strategies. Moderate and severe pandemics were examined, based on estimates of transmissibility and clinical severity of the 1957 and 1918 pandemics respectively, and the cost effectiveness of each strategy was evaluated.ResultsProvided that a pre-pandemic vaccine achieved at least 30% efficacy, pre-emptive vaccination strategies were found to be more cost effective when compared to reactive vaccination strategies. Reactive vaccination coupled with sustained social distancing and antiviral interventions was found to be as effective at saving lives as pre-emptive vaccination coupled with limited duration social distancing and antiviral use, with both strategies saving approximately 420 life-years per 10,000 population for a moderate pandemic with a basic reproduction number of 1.9 and case fatality rate of 0.25%. Reactive vaccination was however more costly due to larger productivity losses incurred by sustained social distancing, costing $8 million per 10,000 population ($19,074/LYS) versus $6.8 million per 10,000 population ($15,897/LYS) for a pre-emptive vaccination strategy. Similar trends were observed for severe pandemics.ConclusionsCompared to reactive vaccination, pre-emptive strategies would be more effective and more cost effective, conditional on the pre-pandemic vaccine being able to achieve a certain level of coverage and efficacy. Reactive vaccination strategies exist which are as effective at mortality reduction as pre-emptive strategies, though they are less cost effective.