Project description:BackgroundCountries in the World Health Organization (WHO) European Region differ in terms of the COVID-19 vaccine supply conditions. We evaluated the health and economic impact of different age-based vaccine prioritisation strategies across this demographically and socio-economically diverse region.MethodsWe fitted age-specific compartmental models to the reported daily COVID-19 mortality in 2020 to inform the immunity level before vaccine roll-out. Models capture country-specific differences in population structures, contact patterns, epidemic history, life expectancy, and GDP per capita.We examined four strategies that prioritise: all adults (V+), younger (20-59 year-olds) followed by older adults (60+) (V20), older followed by younger adults (V60), and the oldest adults (75+) (V75) followed by incrementally younger age groups. We explored four roll-out scenarios (R1-4) - the slowest scenario (R1) reached 30% coverage by December 2022 and the fastest (R4) 80% by December 2021. Five decision-making metrics were summarised over 2021-22: mortality, morbidity, and losses in comorbidity-adjusted life expectancy, comorbidity- and quality-adjusted life years, and human capital. Six vaccine profiles were tested - the highest performing vaccine has 95% efficacy against both infection and disease, and the lowest 50% against diseases and 0% against infection.FindingsOf the 20 decision-making metrics and roll-out scenario combinations, the same optimal strategy applied to all countries in only one combination; V60 was more or similarly desirable than V75 in 19 combinations. Of the 38 countries with fitted models, 11-37 countries had variable optimal strategies by decision-making metrics or roll-out scenarios. There are greater benefits in prioritising older adults when roll-out is slow and when vaccine profiles are less favourable.InterpretationThe optimal age-based vaccine prioritisation strategies were sensitive to country characteristics, decision-making metrics, and roll-out speeds. A prioritisation strategy involving more age-based stages (V75) does not necessarily lead to better health and economic outcomes than targeting broad age groups (V60). Countries expecting a slow vaccine roll-out may particularly benefit from prioritising older adults.FundingWorld Health Organization, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Medical Research Council (United Kingdom), the National Institute of Health Research (United Kingdom), the European Commission, the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (United Kingdom), Wellcome Trust.
Project description:Pneumococcal disease is a potentially fatal bacterial infection that is vaccine-preventable. Malaysia has yet to adopt a pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV) into its national immunization program (NIP). In 2016, pneumonia was the 3rd leading cause of death in children under five in Malaysia, accounting for 3.8% of under-five deaths. Introducing a pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV) is an effective strategy to reduce the disease burden. This study used a decision-analytic model to assess the potential impacts of introducing the available PCVs (13-valent and 10-valent) in Malaysia. Epidemiological and costs inputs were sourced from published literature. For each vaccination program, health outcomes and associated healthcare costs were estimated. The scenarios of initiating PCV13 vs. PCV10 and the status quo (no pneumococcal vaccine) were compared. Serotype trends of Finland and the U.K. were used to model the clinical impacts of PCV10 and PCV13 respectively. The base-case analysis used a societal perspective over a 5-year time horizon. Compared with PCV10, PCV13 was projected to avert an additional 190,628 cases of pneumococcal disease and 1126 cases of death. The acquisition of PCV13 was estimated to cost an incremental US$89,904,777, offset by a cost reduction of -US$250,219,914 on pneumococcal disease-related medical care and lost productivity. PCV13 demonstrated a higher cost-saving potential over PCV10. Compared with no vaccination, PCV13 was estimated as cost-saving. Results were robust across a series of sensitivity analyses. The introduction of PCV13 in a NIP was estimated to reduce a significant burden of disease and to be a cost-saving for the Malaysian health system.
Project description:BackgroundSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-COV-2), the causative agent of the coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19), is a highly transmittable virus. Since the first person-to-person transmission of SARS-CoV-2 was reported in Italy on February 21st, 2020, the number of people infected with SARS-COV-2 increased rapidly, mainly in northern Italian regions, including Piedmont. A strict lockdown was imposed on March 21st until May 4th when a gradual relaxation of the restrictions started. In this context, computational models and computer simulations are one of the available research tools that epidemiologists can exploit to understand the spread of the diseases and to evaluate social measures to counteract, mitigate or delay the spread of the epidemic.MethodsThis study presents an extended version of the Susceptible-Exposed-Infected-Removed-Susceptible (SEIRS) model accounting for population age structure. The infectious population is divided into three sub-groups: (i) undetected infected individuals, (ii) quarantined infected individuals and (iii) hospitalized infected individuals. Moreover, the strength of the government restriction measures and the related population response to these are explicitly represented in the model.ResultsThe proposed model allows us to investigate different scenarios of the COVID-19 spread in Piedmont and the implementation of different infection-control measures and testing approaches. The results show that the implemented control measures have proven effective in containing the epidemic, mitigating the potential dangerous impact of a large proportion of undetected cases. We also forecast the optimal combination of individual-level measures and community surveillance to contain the new wave of COVID-19 spread after the re-opening work and social activities.ConclusionsOur model is an effective tool useful to investigate different scenarios and to inform policy makers about the potential impact of different control strategies. This will be crucial in the upcoming months, when very critical decisions about easing control measures will need to be taken.
Project description:Dexamethasone can reduce mortality in hospitalised COVID-19 patients needing oxygen and ventilation by 18% and 36%, respectively. Here, we estimate the potential number of lives saved and life years gained if this treatment were to be rolled out in the UK and globally, as well as the cost-effectiveness of implementing this intervention. Assuming SARS-CoV-2 exposure levels of 5% to 15%, we estimate that, for the UK, approximately 12,000 (4,250 - 27,000) lives could be saved between July and December 2020. Assuming that dexamethasone has a similar effect size in settings where access to oxygen therapies is limited, this would translate into approximately 650,000 (240,000 - 1,400,000) lives saved globally over the same time period. If dexamethasone acts differently in these settings, the impact could be less than half of this value. To estimate the full potential of dexamethasone in the global fight against COVID-19, it is essential to perform clinical research in settings with limited access to oxygen and/or ventilators, for example in low- and middle-income countries.
Project description:We developed a COVID-19 transmission model to compare the effects of nonpharmaceutical public health interventions (NPIs) on health and economic outcomes. An interdisciplinary approach informed the selection and use of multiple NPIs, combining quantitative modeling of the health and economic impacts of interventions with qualitative assessments of other important considerations (e.g., cost, ease of implementation, equity). We used our model to analyzed strategies that periodically switch between a base NPI and a high NPI level. We find that this systematic strategy could have produced similar health outcomes as static strategies but better social welfare and economic outcomes. Our findings suggest that there are opportunities to shape the tradeoffs between economic and health outcomes by carefully evaluating a more comprehensive range of reopening policies.
Project description:ObjectivesDespite the availability of HIV testing guidelines to facilitate prompt diagnosis, late HIV diagnosis remains high across Europe. The study synthesizes recent evidence on HIV testing strategies adopted in health care settings in the European Union/European Economic Area (EU/EEA).MethodsPreferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed and systematic searches were run in five databases (2010-2017) to identify studies describing HIV testing interventions in health care settings in the EU/EEA. The grey literature was searched for unpublished studies (2014-2017). Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data extraction and critical appraisal.ResultsOne hundred and thirty intervention and/or feasibility studies on HIV testing in health care settings were identified. Interventions included testing provision (n = 94), campaigns (n = 14) and education and training for staff and patients (n = 20). HIV test coverage achieved through testing provision varied: 2.9-94% in primary care compared to 3.9-66% in emergency departments. HIV test positivity was lower in emergency departments (0-1.3%) and antenatal services (0-0.05%) than in other hospital departments (e.g. inpatients: 0-5.3%). Indicator condition testing programmes increased HIV test coverage from 3.9-72% before to 12-85% after their implementation, with most studies reporting a 10-20% increase. There were 51 feasibility and/or acceptability studies that demonstrated that HIV testing interventions were generally acceptable to patients and providers in health care settings (e.g. general practitioner testing acceptable: 77-93%).ConclusionsThis review has identified several strategies that could be adopted to achieve high HIV testing coverage across a variety of health care settings and populations in the EU/EEA. Very few studies compared the intervention under investigation to a baseline, but, where this was assessed, data suggested increases in testing.
Project description:IntroductionIn the context of a highly contagious virus with only recently approved vaccines and no cure, the key to slowing the spread of the COVID-19 disease and successfully transitioning through the phases of the pandemic, including vaccine uptake, is public adherence to rapidly evolving behaviour-based public health policies. The overall objective of the iCARE Study is to assess public awareness, attitudes, concerns and behavioural responses to COVID-19 public health policies, and their impacts, on people around the world and to link behavioural survey data with policy, mobility and case data to provide behavioural science, data-driven recommendations to governments on how to optimise current policy strategies to reduce the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.Methods and analysesThe iCARE study (www.icarestudy.com) uses a multiple cross-sectional survey design to capture self-reported information on a variety of COVID-19 related variables from individuals around the globe. Survey data are captured using two data capture methods: convenience and representative sampling. These data are then linked to open access data for policies, cases and population movement.Ethics and disseminationThe primary ethical approval was obtained from the coordinating site, the Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux du Nord-de-l'Île-de-Montréal (REB#: 2020-2099/03-25-2020). This study will provide high-quality, accelerated and real-time evidence to help us understand the effectiveness of evolving country-level policies and communication strategies to reduce the spread of the COVID-19. Due to the urgency of the pandemic, results will be disseminated in a variety of ways, including policy briefs, social media posts, press releases and through regular scientific methods.
Project description:BackgroundHow best to prioritise COVID-19 vaccination within and between countries has been a public health and an ethical challenge for decision-makers globally. We reviewed epidemiological and economic modelling evidence on population priority groups to minimise COVID-19 mortality, transmission, and morbidity outcomes.MethodsWe searched the National Institute of Health iSearch COVID-19 Portfolio (a database of peer-reviewed and pre-print articles), Econlit, the Centre for Economic Policy Research, and the National Bureau of Economic Research for mathematical modelling studies evaluating the impact of prioritising COVID-19 vaccination to population target groups. The first search was conducted on March 3, 2021, and an updated search on the LMIC literature was conducted from March 3, 2021, to September 24, 2021. We narratively synthesised the main study conclusions on prioritisation and the conditions under which the conclusions changed.ResultsThe initial search identified 1820 studies and 36 studies met the inclusion criteria. The updated search on LMIC literature identified 7 more studies. 43 studies in total were narratively synthesised. 74% of studies described outcomes in high-income countries (single and multi-country). We found that for countries seeking to minimise deaths, prioritising vaccination of senior adults was the optimal strategy and for countries seeking to minimise cases the young were prioritised. There were several exceptions to the main conclusion, notably that reductions in deaths could be increased if groups at high risk of both transmission and death could be further identified. Findings were also sensitive to the level of vaccine coverage.ConclusionThe evidence supports WHO SAGE recommendations on COVID-19 vaccine prioritisation. There is, however, an evidence gap on optimal prioritisation for low- and middle-income countries, studies that included an economic evaluation, and studies that explore prioritisation strategies if the aim is to reduce overall health burden including morbidity.
Project description:The switch from primary cytology to primary high risk papillomavirus (HR-HPV) testing for cervical screening is now being implemented in a number of countries. The advantages of this are to increase screening sensitivity which will save lives, and at the same time to extend screening intervals. The challenge with HR-HPV testing is its relatively poor specificity which means identifying a large number of women who are HR-HPV positive with negative cytology. One way of tackling this is to use early recall, in order to select referral to colposcopy to those women who do not clear the virus over a period of 1-2 years, as done in the recently published English Pilot Study. Another challenge in optimising screening is to recognise that wide coverage with prophylactic vaccination will require fewer screens over the lifetime of vaccinated women to maintain cost-effectiveness. HR-HPV testing allows self sampling which could both encourage more women to be screened and be more convenient for those who do wish to be screened. Cervical cancer prevention which combines vaccination and screening now offers a future in which cervical cancer could become a rarity, but efficient strategies need to be implemented.
Project description:Introduction Government policies on taxation and social security are important determinants of population health outcomes and health inequalities. However, there is a shortage of evidence to inform policymakers of the health consequences of such policies. The Health Equity and Its Economic Determinants project aims to assess the potential impacts of different taxation and social security policies across Europe on population health and health inequalities using a computer-based simulation that provides projections over multiple health domains. Methods and analysis In the first phase, key input parameters for the model will be estimated using estimation techniques that control for the effects of prior exposure on time-varying confounders and mediators (g-methods). The second phase will involve developing and validating the microsimulation model for the UK. Policy proposals, developed with policymakers, will be simulated in the third phase to investigate the impacts of income tax and social security changes on population health and health inequalities. In the final phase, the microsimulation model will be extended across other European countries. Ethics and dissemination This project will use deidentified secondary data for which ethical approval and consents were received by the original data collectors. No further ethical approval will be required for our main analytical datasets. Dissemination plans include academic publications, conference presentations, accessible policy briefings, mass media engagement and a project website. Both the syntax and the underlying synthetic data for the HEED microsimulation model will be made freely available through GitHub and the project website.