Global economic evaluation of oral cholera vaccine: A systematic review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Teoh SL
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5806687 | biostudies-other | 2018 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Publications
Global economic evaluation of oral cholera vaccine: A systematic review.
Teoh Siew Li SL Kotirum Surachai S Hutubessy Raymond C W RCW Chaiyakunapruk Nathorn N
Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics 20171215 2
World Health Organization recommends oral cholera vaccine (OCV) to prevent and control cholera, but requires cost-effectiveness evidence. This review aimed to provide a critical appraisal and summary of global economic evaluation (EE) studies involving OCV to guide future EE study. Full EE studies, published from inception to December 2015, evaluating OCV against cholera disease were included. The included studies were appraised using WHO guide for standardization of EE of immunization programs. ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Cholera is both an endemic and epidemic disease in many low and middle-income countries (LMICs). Strategies for cholera control include improving water, sanitation, and hygiene; providing early and effective treatment; and deploying oral cholera vaccine (OCV). This last strategy is relatively new, and countries considering its introduction are interested in knowing the potential cost not only of the vaccine, but also the cost of introduction. This paper describes the costing of OCV introduction in LMICs using a publicly available Excel-based tool known as the CholTool. It includes estimates of delivery cost categories which cover not only the service delivery costs (e.g. vaccine procurement, handling, storage, and transport; vaccination administration, monitoring supervision, and field support), but also the programmatic costs associated with introducing a new vaccine (i.e. microplanning, communication and training materials development, sensitization/social mobilization, and personnel training) to ensure that a comprehensive estimate is provided with health payer perspective. CholTool takes the user through a structured sequence of interlinked modules containing input parameter cells (assumptions), decision cells (variable selections), and formulas (calculations) to produce customized cost estimates based on standardized methods. The tool provides both financial and economic cost estimates, to ensure that both costs are available for consideration. Four examples of applications of CholTool are presented in three countries- one in Ethiopia, two in Malawi and one in Nepal. The estimates of economic delivery cost per dose (including service delivery and programmatic costs) were (in USD 2016): $2.89 in Ethiopia, $3.04 in Malawi1, $3.35 in Malawi2 and $3.06 in Nepal. A cost projection conducted before the campaign using the tool and a retrospective costing using the tool in Nepal resulted in no significant difference between economic delivery costs per dose.
| S-EPMC8641596 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSnakebite envenoming, a high priority Neglected Tropical Disease categorized by the World Health Organization (WHO), has been considered as a poverty-related disease that requires greater global awareness and collaboration to establish strategies that effectively decrease economic burdens. This prompts the need for a comprehensive review of the global literature that summarizes the global economic burden and a description of methodology details and their variation. This study aimed to systematically identify studies on cost of illness and economic evaluation associated with snakebites, summarize study findings, and evaluate their methods to provide recommendations for future studies.MethodsWe searched PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library, and Econlit for articles published from inception to 31 July 2019. Original articles reporting costs or full economic evaluation related with snakebites were included. The methods and reporting quality were assessed. Costs were presented in US dollars (US$) in 2018.ResultsTwenty-three cost of illness studies and three economic evaluation studies related to snakebites were included. Majority of studies (18/23, 78.26%) were conducted in Low- and Middle-income countries. Most cost of illness studies (82.61%) were done using hospital-based data of snakebite patients. While, four studies (17.39%) estimated costs of snakebites in communities. Five studies (21.74%) used societal perspective estimating both direct and indirect costs. Only one study (4.35%) undertook incidence-based approach to estimate lifetime costs. Only three studies (13.04%) estimated annual national economic burdens of snakebite which varied drastically from US$126 319 in Burkina Faso to US$13 802 550 in Sri Lanka. Quality of the cost of illness studies were varied and substantially under-reported. All three economic evaluation studies were cost-effectiveness analysis using decision tree model. Two of them assessed cost-effectiveness of having full access to antivenom and reported cost-effective findings.ConclusionsEconomic burdens of snakebite were underestimated and not extensively studied. To accurately capture the economic burdens of snakebites at both the global and local level, hospital data should be collected along with community survey and economic burdens of snakebites should be estimated both in short-term and long-term period to incorporate the lifetime costs and productivity loss due to premature death, disability, and consequences of snakebites.
| S-EPMC7719278 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundKilled whole-cell oral cholera vaccines (kOCVs) are becoming a standard cholera control and prevention tool. However, vaccine efficacy and direct effectiveness estimates have varied, with differences in study design, location, follow-up duration, and vaccine composition posing challenges for public health decision making. We did a systematic review and meta-analysis to generate average estimates of kOCV efficacy and direct effectiveness from the available literature.MethodsFor this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Review Library on July 9, 2016, and ISI Web of Science on July 11, 2016, for randomised controlled trials and observational studies that reported estimates of direct protection against medically attended confirmed cholera conferred by kOCVs. We included studies published on any date in English, Spanish, French, or Chinese. We extracted from the published reports the primary efficacy and effectiveness estimates from each study and also estimates according to number of vaccine doses, duration, and age group. The main study outcome was average efficacy and direct effectiveness of two kOCV doses, which we estimated with random-effect models. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42016048232.FindingsSeven trials (with 695 patients with cholera) and six observational studies (217 patients with cholera) met the inclusion criteria, with an average two-dose efficacy of 58% (95% CI 42-69, I2=58%) and effectiveness of 76% (62-85, I2=0). Average two-dose efficacy in children younger than 5 years (30% [95% CI 15-42], I2=0%) was lower than in those 5 years or older (64% [58-70], I2=0%; p<0·0001). Two-dose efficacy estimates of kOCV were similar during the first 2 years after vaccination, with estimates of 56% (95% CI 42-66, I2=45%) in the first year and 59% (49-67, I2=0) in the second year. The efficacy reduced to 39% (13 to 57, I2=48%) in the third year, and 26% (-46 to 63, I2=74%) in the fourth year.InterpretationTwo kOCV doses provide protection against cholera for at least 3 years. One kOCV dose provides at least short-term protection, which has important implications for outbreak management. kOCVs are effective tools for cholera control.FundingThe Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
| S-EPMC5639147 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In addition to improved water supply and sanitation, the 2-dose killed oral cholera vaccine (OCV) is an important tool for the prevention and control of cholera. We aimed to document the immunogenicity and protection (efficacy and effectiveness) conferred by a single OCV dose against cholera. The metaanalysis showed that an estimated 73% and 77% of individuals seroconverted to the Ogawa and Inaba serotypes, respectively, after an OCV first dose. The estimates of single-dose vaccine protection from available studies are 87% at 2 months decreasing to 33% at 2 years. Current immunologic and clinical data suggest that protection conferred by a single dose of killed OCV may be sufficient to reduce short-term risk in outbreaks or other high-risk settings, which may be especially useful when vaccine supply is limited. However, until more data suggest otherwise, a second dose should be given as soon as circumstances allow to ensure robust protection.
| S-EPMC5982790 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe rapid increase in opioid overdose and opioid use disorder (OUD) over the past 20 years is a complex problem associated with significant economic costs for healthcare systems and society. Simulation models have been developed to capture and identify ways to manage this complexity and to evaluate the potential costs of different strategies to reduce overdoses and OUD. A review of simulation-based economic evaluations is warranted to fully characterize this set of literature.MethodsA systematic review of simulation-based economic evaluation (SBEE) studies in opioid research was initiated by searches in PubMed, EMBASE, and EbscoHOST. Extraction of a predefined set of items and a quality assessment were performed for each study.ResultsThe screening process resulted in 23 SBEE studies ranging by year of publication from 1999 to 2019. Methodological quality of the cost analyses was moderately high. The most frequently evaluated strategies were methadone and buprenorphine maintenance treatments; the only harm reduction strategy explored was naloxone distribution. These strategies were consistently found to be cost-effective, especially naloxone distribution and methadone maintenance. Prevention strategies were limited to abuse-deterrent opioid formulations. Less than half (39%) of analyses adopted a societal perspective in their estimation of costs and effects from an opioid-related intervention. Prevention strategies and studies' accounting for patient and physician preference, changing costs, or result stratification were largely ignored in these SBEEs.ConclusionThe review shows consistently favorable cost analysis findings for naloxone distribution strategies and opioid agonist treatments and identifies major gaps for future research.
| S-EPMC7864393 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC4151976 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe purpose of this article was to ascertain the existing literature and find the gaps in economic evaluations of cataracts.MethodsSystematic methods were used to search and collect the published literature on economic evaluations of cataracts. A mapping review of studies published in the following bibliographical databases was performed: the National Library of Medicine (PubMed), EMBASE, Web of Science (WOS), and the Central of Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) database. A descriptive analysis was conducted and relevant studies were classified into different groups.ResultsAmong 984 studies screened, 56 studies were included in the mapping review. Four research questions were answered. There has been a progressive increase of publications during the last decade. The majority of the included studies were published by authors from institutions in the USA and UK. The most commonly investigated area was cataract surgery followed by intraocular lenses (IOLs). The studies were classified into different categories according to the main outcome evaluated, such as comparisons between different surgical techniques, costs of the cataract surgery, second eye cataract surgery costs, quality of life gain after cataract surgery, waiting time of cataract surgery and costs, and cataract evaluation, follow-up, and costs. In the IOL classification, the most frequently studied area was the comparison between monofocal and multifocal IOLs, followed by the comparison between toric and monofocal IOLs.ConclusionsCataract surgery is a cost-effective procedure compared with other non-ophthalmic and ophthalmic interventions and surgery waiting time is an important factor to consider because vision loss has a huge and broad-ranging impact on society. Numerous gaps and inconsistencies are found among the studies included. For this reason, there is a need for further studies according to the classification described in the mapping review.
| S-EPMC10011294 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe objective of this systematic review was to examine the existing evidence base for the cost-effectiveness or cost-benefit of clinical quality registries (CQRs).DesignSystematic review and narrative synthesis.Data sourcesNine electronic bibliographic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL, in the period from January 2000 to August 2019.Eligibility criteriaAny peer-reviewed published study or grey literature in English which had reported on an economic evaluation of one or more CQRs.Data extraction and synthesisData were screened, extracted and appraised by two independent reviewers. A narrative synthesis was performed around key attributes of each CQR and on key patient outcomes or changes to healthcare processes or utilisation. A narrative synthesis of the cost-effectiveness associated with CQRs was also conducted. The primary outcome was cost-effectiveness, in terms of the estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), cost savings or return-on-investment (ROI) attributed to CQR implementation.ResultsThree studies and one government report met the inclusion criteria for the review. A study of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Programme (NSQIP) in the USA found that the cost-effectiveness of this registry improved over time, based on an ICER of US$8312 per postoperative event avoided. A separate study in Canada estimated the ROI to be US$3.43 per US$1.00 invested in the NSQIP. An evaluation of a post-splenectomy CQR in Australia estimated that registry cost-effectiveness improved from US$234?329 to US$18?358 per life year gained when considering the benefits accrued over the lifetime of the population. The government report evaluating five Australian CQRs estimated an overall return of 1.6-5.5 times the cost of investment.ConclusionsAvailable data indicate that CQRs can be cost-effective and can lead to significant returns on investment. It is clear that further studies that evaluate the economic and clinical impacts of CQRs are necessary.Prospero registration numberCRD42018116807.
| S-EPMC6924778 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSafe and effective vaccination is considered to be the most critical strategy to fight coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), leading to individual and herd immunity protection. We aimed to systematically review the economic evaluation of COVID-19 vaccination globally.MethodsWe performed a systematic search to identify relevant studies in two major databases (MEDLINE/PubMed and EBSCO) published until September 8, 2022. After deduplication, two researchers independently screened the study titles and abstracts according to pre-determined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The remaining full-text studies were assessed for eligibility. We assessed their quality of reporting using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 checklist and summarized and narratively presented the results.ResultsWe identified 25 studies that assessed the economic evaluation of COVID-19 vaccination worldwide by considering several input parameters, including vaccine cost, vaccine efficacy, utility value, and the size of the targeted population. All studies suggested that COVID-19 vaccination was a cost-effective or cost-saving intervention for mitigating coronavirus transmission and its effect in many countries within certain conditions. Most studies reported vaccine efficacy values ranging from 65% to 75%.ConclusionsGiven the favorable cost-effectiveness profile of COVID-19 vaccines and disparities in affordability across countries, considering prioritization has become paramount. This review provides comprehensive insights into the economic evaluation of COVID-19 vaccination that will be useful to policymakers, particularly in highlighting preventive measures and preparedness plans for the next possible pandemic.
| S-EPMC9838689 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo evaluate and compare full economic evaluation studies on the cost-effectiveness of enhanced asthma management (either as an adjunct to usual care or alone) vs. usual care alone.MethodsOnline databases were searched for published journal articles in English language from year 1990 to 2012, using the search terms '"asthma" AND ("intervene" OR "manage") AND ("pharmacoeconomics" OR "economic evaluation" OR "cost effectiveness" OR "cost benefit" OR "cost utility")'. Hand search was done for local publishing. Only studies with full economic evaluation on enhanced management were included (cost consequences (CC), cost effectiveness (CE), cost benefit (CB), or cost utility (CU) analysis). Data were extracted and assessed for the quality of its economic evaluation design and evidence sources.ResultsA total of 49 studies were included. There were 3 types of intervention for enhanced asthma management: education, environmental control, and self-management. The most cost-effective enhanced management was a mixture of education and self-management by an integrated team of healthcare and allied healthcare professionals. In general, the studies had a fair quality of economic evaluation with a mean QHES score of 73.7 (SD=9.7), and had good quality of evidence sources.ConclusionDespite the overall fair quality of economic evaluations but good quality of evidence sources for all data components, this review showed that the delivered enhanced asthma managements, whether as single or mixed modes, were overall effective and cost-reducing. Whilst the availability and accessibility are an equally important factor to consider, the sustainability of the cost-effective management has to be further investigated using a longer time horizon especially for chronic diseases such as asthma.
| S-EPMC4282768 | biostudies-literature