Estimating the cost-effectiveness of a national program to eliminate disparities in influenza vaccination rates among elderly minority groups

Economic evaluation of seasonal influenza vaccination in elderly and health workers: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A number of cost-effectiveness analysis of influenza vaccination have been conducted to estimate value of influenza vaccines in elderly and health workers (HWs). This study aims to summarize cost-effectiveness evidence by pooling the incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) of influenza vaccination.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed in electronic databases from their inceptions to February 2022. Cost-effectiveness studies reporting quality-adjusted life year (QALY), or life year (LY) of influenza vaccination were included. Stratified meta-analyses by population, perspective, country income-level, and herd-effect were performed to pool INMB across studies. The protocol was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42021246746).

FINDINGS

A total of 21 studies were included. Eighteen studies were conducted in elderly, two studies were conducted in HWs, and one study was conducted in both elderly and HWs. According to pre-specified analyses, studies for elderly in high-income economies (countries) (HIEs) and upper-middle income economies (UMIEs) without herd effect could be pooled. For HIEs under a societal perspective, the perspective which identify all relevant costs occurred in the society including direct medical cost, direct non-medical cost and indirect cost, pooled INMB was $217·38 (206·23, 228·53, I² =28.2%), while that for healthcare provider/payer perspective was $0·20 (-11,908·67, 11,909·07, I² = 0.0%). For societal perspective in UMIEs, pooled INMB was $28·39 (-190·65, 133·87, I² = 92.8%). The findings were robust across a series of sensitivity analyses for HIEs. Studies in HWs indicated that influenza vaccination was cost-effective compared to no vaccination or current practice.

INTERPRETATION

Influenza vaccination might be cost-effective for HWs and elderly in HIEs under a societal perspective with relatively small variations among included studies, while there remains limited evidence for healthcare provider/payer perspective or other level of incomes. Further evidence is warranted.

FUNDING

This study was funded by a grant of Immunization, Vaccine and Biologicals department of the World Health Organization. The authors would like to acknowledge the contributions of the US CDC which provided financial support to the development and publication of this report. Grant number US CDC, WHO IVR (U50CK000431).

Interventions on Socioeconomic and Racial Inequities in Respiratory Pandemics: a Rapid Systematic Review

Purpose of Review

Racial and socioeconomic inequities in respiratory pandemics have been consistently documented, but little official guidance exists on effective action to prevent these. We systematically reviewed quantitative evaluations of (real or simulated) interventions targeting racial and socioeconomic inequities in respiratory pandemic outcomes.

Recent Findings

Our systematic search returned 10,208 records, of which 5 met inclusion criteria, including observational (n = 1), randomized trial (n = 1), and simulation (n = 3) studies. Interventions studied included vaccination parity, antiviral distribution, school closure, disinfection, personal protective equipment, and paid sick leave, with a focus on Black (n = 3) and/or Latinx (n = 4) or low-SES (n = 2) communities. Results are suggestive that these interventions might be effective at reducing racial and/or SES disparities in pandemics.

Summary

There is a dearth of research on strategies to reduce pandemic disparities. We provide theory-driven, concrete suggestions for incorporating equity into intervention research for pandemic preparedness, including a focus on social and economic policies.

Inclusion of Safety-Related Issues in Economic Evaluations for Seasonal Influenza Vaccines: A Systematic Review

(1) Background: Vaccines for seasonal influenza are a good preventive and cost-effective strategy. However, it is unknown if and how these economic evaluations include the adverse events following immunization (AEFI), and what the impact of such inclusion is on the health economic outcomes. (2) Methods: We searched the literature, up to January 2020, to identify economic evaluations of seasonal influenza vaccines that considered AEFIs. The review protocol was published in PROSPERO (CDR42017058523). (3) Results: A total of 52 economic evaluations considered AEFI-related parameters in their analyses, reflecting 16% of the economic evaluations on seasonal influenza vaccines in the initial study selection. Most studies used the societal perspective (64%) and evaluated vaccination of children (37%). Where considered, studies included direct medical costs of AEFIs (90%), indirect costs (27%), and disutilities/quality-adjusted life years loss due to AEFIs (37%). The majority of these studies accounted for the effects of the costs of AEFI on cost-effectiveness for Guillain–Barré syndrome. In those papers allowing cost share estimation, direct medical cost of AFEIs was less than 2% of total direct costs. (4) Conclusions: Although the overall impact of AEFIs on the cost-effectiveness outcomes was found to be low, we urge their inclusion in economic evaluations of seasonal influenza vaccines to reflect comprehensive reports for the decision makers and end-users of the vaccination strategies.

The value of decreasing the duration of the infectious period of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection

Finding medications or vaccines that may decrease the infectious period of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) could potentially reduce transmission in the broader population. We developed a computational model of the U.S. simulating the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and the potential clinical and economic impact of reducing the infectious period duration. Simulation experiments found that reducing the average infectious period duration could avert a median of 442,852 [treating 25% of symptomatic cases, reducing by 0.5 days, reproductive number (R₀) 3.5, and starting treatment when 15% of the population has been exposed] to 44.4 million SARS-CoV-2 cases (treating 75% of all infected cases, reducing by 3.5 days, R₀ 2.0). With R₀ 2.5, reducing the average infectious period duration by 0.5 days for 25% of symptomatic cases averted 1.4 million cases and 99,398 hospitalizations; increasing to 75% of symptomatic cases averted 2.8 million cases. At $500/person, treating 25% of symptomatic cases saved $209.5 billion (societal perspective). Further reducing the average infectious period duration by 3.5 days averted 7.4 million cases (treating 25% of symptomatic cases). Expanding treatment to 75% of all infected cases, including asymptomatic infections (R₀ 2.5), averted 35.9 million cases and 4 million hospitalizations, saving $48.8 billion (societal perspective and starting treatment after 5% of the population has been exposed). Our study quantifies the potential effects of reducing the SARS-CoV-2 infectious period duration.

Finding medications or vaccines that may decrease the infectious period of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) could potentially reduce transmission in the broader population. We developed a computational model of the U.S. simulating the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and the potential clinical and economic impact of reducing the infectious period duration. Our simulation experiments found that reducing the average infectious period duration could avert a median of 442,852 to 44.4 million SARS-CoV-2 cases, varying the proportion of cases treated, average duration of the infectious period, and the reproductive rate. At $500/person, treating 25% of symptomatic cases saved $209.5 billion (societal perspective, R₀ 2.5). Further reducing the average infectious period duration by 3.5 days averted 7.4 million cases (treating 25% of symptomatic cases). Expanding treatment to 75% of all infected cases, including asymptomatic infections (R₀ 2.5), averted 35.9 million cases and 4 million hospitalizations, saving $48.8 billion (societal perspective and starting treatment after 5% of the population has been exposed). Our study suggests that finding ways to reduce the infectious period of SARS-CoV-2 could help decrease its spread and impact.

How Efficacious Must a COVID-19 Coronavirus Vaccine be to Prevent or Stop an Epidemic by Itself

BACKGROUND

Given the continuing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and much of the U.S. implementing social distancing due to the lack of alternatives, there has been a push to develop a vaccine to eliminate the need for social distancing.

METHODS

In 2020, we developed a computational model of the U.S. simulating the spread of COVID-19 coronavirus and vaccination.

RESULTS

Simulation experiments revealed that when vaccine efficacy exceeded 70%, coverage exceeded 60%, and vaccination occurred on day 1, the attack rate dropped to 22% with daily cases not exceeding 3.2 million (reproductive rate, R0, 2.5). When R0 was 3.5, the attack rate dropped to 41% with daily cases not exceeding 14.4 million. Increasing coverage to 75% when vaccination occurred by day 90 resulted in 5% attack rate and daily cases not exceeding 258,029when R0 was 2.5 and a 26% attack rate and maximum daily cases of 22.6 million when R0 was 3.5. When vaccination did not occur until day 180, coverage (i.e., those vaccinated plus those otherwise immune) had to reach 100%. A vaccine with an efficacy between 40% and 70% could still obviate the need for other measures under certain circumstances such as much higher, and in some cases, potentially unachievable, vaccination coverages.

CONCLUSION

Our study found that to either prevent or largely extinguish an epidemic without any other measures (e.g., social distancing), the vaccine has to have an efficacy of at least 70%.

Epidemiologic and economic impact of pharmacies as vaccination locations during an influenza epidemic

Introduction:

During an influenza epidemic, where early vaccination is crucial, pharmacies may be a resource to increase vaccine distribution reach and capacity.

Methods:

We utilized an agent-based model of the US and a clinical and economics outcomes model to simulate the impact of different influenza epidemics and the impact of utilizing pharmacies in addition to traditional (hospitals, clinic/physician offices, and urgent care centers) locations for vaccination for the year 2017.

Results:

For an epidemic with a reproductive rate (R0) of 1.30, adding pharmacies with typical business hours averted 11.9 million symptomatic influenza cases, 23,577 to 94,307 deaths, $1.0 billion in direct (vaccine administration and healthcare) costs, $4.2–44.4 billion in productivity losses, and $5.2–45.3 billion in overall costs (varying with mortality rate). Increasing the epidemic severity (R0 of 1.63), averted 16.0 million symptomatic influenza cases, 35,407 to 141,625 deaths, $1.9 billion in direct costs, $6.0–65.5 billion in productivity losses, and $7.8–67.3 billion in overall costs (varying with mortality rate). Extending pharmacy hours averted up to 16.5 million symptomatic influenza cases, 145,278 deaths, $1.9 billion direct costs, $4.1 billion in productivity loss, and $69.5 billion in overall costs. Adding pharmacies resulted in a cost-benefit of $4.1 to $11.5 billion, varying epidemic severity, mortality rate, pharmacy hours, location vaccination rate, and delay in the availability of the vaccine.

Conclusions:

Administering vaccines through pharmacies in addition to traditional locations in the event of an epidemic can increase vaccination coverage, mitigating up to 23.7 million symptomatic influenza cases, providing cost-savings up to $2.8 billion to third-party payers and $99.8 billion to society. Pharmacies should be considered as points of dispensing epidemic vaccines in addition to traditional settings as soon as vaccines become available.

Cost-effectiveness of increasing vaccination in high-risk adults aged 18-64 Years: a model-based decision analysis

BACKGROUND

Adults aged 18-64 years with comorbid conditions are at high risk for complications of certain vaccine-preventable diseases, including influenza and pneumococcal disease. The 4 Pillars™ Practice Transformation Program (4 Pillars Program) increases uptake of pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine, influenza vaccine and tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis vaccine by 5-10% among adults with high-risk medical conditions, but its cost-effectiveness is unknown.

METHODS

A decision tree model estimated the cost-effectiveness of implementing the 4 Pillars Program in primary care practices compared to no program for a population of adults 18-64 years of age at high risk of illness complications over a 10 year time horizon. Vaccination rates and intervention costs were derived from a randomized controlled cluster trial in diverse practices in 2 U.S. cities. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

From a third-party payer perspective, which considers direct medical costs, the 4 Pillars Program cost $28,301 per quality-adjusted life year gained; from a societal perspective, which adds direct nonmedical and indirect costs, the program was cost saving and more effective than no intervention. Cost effectiveness results favoring the program were robust in sensitivity analyses. From a public health standpoint, the model predicted that the intervention reduced influenza cases by 1.4%, with smaller decreases in pertussis and pneumococcal disease cases.

CONCLUSION

The 4 Pillars Practice Transformation Program is an economically reasonable, and perhaps cost saving, strategy for protecting the health of adults aged < 65 years with high-risk medical conditions.

Variation in loss of immunity shapes influenza epidemics and the impact of vaccination

BACKGROUND

Protective antibody immunity against the influenza A virus wanes in 2-7 years due to antigenic drift of the virus' surface proteins. The duration of immune protection is highly variable because antigenic evolution of the virus is irregular. Currently, the variable nature of the duration of immunity has had little attention in analyses of the impact of vaccination, including cost-effectiveness studies.

METHODS

We developed a range of mathematical transmission models to investigate the effect of variable duration of immunity on the size of seasonal epidemics. The models range from simple conceptual to more realistic, by distinguishing between infection- versus vaccination-induced immunity, by inclusion of primary vaccine failure, by assuming a leaky vaccine, and by the inclusion of age-dependent contact patterns.

RESULTS

We show that annual variation in the duration of immunity causes large variation in the size of epidemics, and affects the effectiveness of vaccination. Accumulation of susceptible individuals in one or more mild seasons results in a disproportionately large outbreak in a subsequent season. Importantly, variation in the duration of immunity increases the average infection attack rate when the vaccination coverage is around the outbreak threshold. Specifically, in a tailored age-stratified model with a realistic reproduction number (R ₀ = 1.4) and vaccination coverage of 25%, we find that the attack rate in unvaccinated children (<10 years old) is negligible if the duration of immunity is constant, while on average 2.8% (2.5-97.5% percentiles: 1.8-4.1%) of the children are infected if the duration of immunity is variable. These findings stem from the buildup of susceptibility over multiple seasons by waning of immunity, and the nonlinear relation between susceptibility and infection attack rates.

CONCLUSIONS

The models illustrate that variation in the duration of immunity impacts the long-term effectiveness of vaccination, and that vaccine effectiveness cannot be judged for each year in isolation. Our findings have implications for vaccination strategies that aim to maximize the vaccination coverage while extending the age range of persons eligible for vaccination.

Cost-Effectiveness of the 4 Pillars Practice Transformation Program to Improve Vaccination of Adults Aged 65 and Older

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of an intervention to increase pneumococcal, influenza, and pertussis-containing vaccine uptake in adults aged 65 and older in primary care practices.

DESIGN

Markov decision analysis model, comparing the cost-effectiveness of the 4 Pillars Practice Transformation Program with no intervention.

SETTING

Diverse primary care practices in two U.S. cities.

PARTICIPANTS

Clinical trial participants aged 65 and older.

MEASUREMENTS

Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), public health outcomes, and costs. Vaccination rates and intervention costs were derived from a randomized controlled cluster trial. Other parameters were derived from the medical literature and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data. All parameters were individually and simultaneously varied over their distributions.

RESULTS

With the intervention program and extrapolating over 10 years, there would be approximately 60,920 fewer influenza cases, 2,031 fewer pertussis cases, and 13,842 fewer pneumococcal illnesses in adults aged 65 and older. Total per-person vaccination and illness costs with the intervention were $23.93 higher than without the intervention, with a concurrent increase in effectiveness of 0.0031 QALYs, or $7,635 per QALY gained. In sensitivity analyses, no individual parameter variation caused the intervention to cost more than $50,000 per QALY gained.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementing an intervention based on the 4 Pillars Practice Transformation Program is a cost-effective undertaking in primary care practices for individuals aged 65 and older, with predicted public health benefits.

Unremarked or Unperformed? Systematic Review on Reporting of Validation Efforts of Health Economic Decision Models in Seasonal Influenza and Early Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

Transparent reporting of validation efforts of health economic models give stakeholders better insight into the credibility of model outcomes. In this study we reviewed recently published studies on seasonal influenza and early breast cancer in order to gain insight into the reporting of model validation efforts in the overall health economic literature.

METHODS

A literature search was performed in Pubmed and Embase to retrieve health economic modelling studies published between 2008 and 2014. Reporting on model validation was evaluated by checking for the word validation, and by using AdViSHE (Assessment of the Validation Status of Health Economic decision models), a tool containing a structured list of relevant items for validation. Additionally, we contacted corresponding authors to ask whether more validation efforts were performed other than those reported in the manuscripts.

RESULTS

A total of 53 studies on seasonal influenza and 41 studies on early breast cancer were included in our review. The word validation was used in 16 studies (30 %) on seasonal influenza and 23 studies (56 %) on early breast cancer; however, in a minority of studies, this referred to a model validation technique. Fifty-seven percent of seasonal influenza studies and 71 % of early breast cancer studies reported one or more validation techniques. Cross-validation of study outcomes was found most often. A limited number of studies reported on model validation efforts, although good examples were identified. Author comments indicated that more validation techniques were performed than those reported in the manuscripts.

CONCLUSIONS

Although validation is deemed important by many researchers, this is not reflected in the reporting habits of health economic modelling studies. Systematic reporting of validation efforts would be desirable to further enhance decision makers' confidence in health economic models and their outcomes.

An economic model assessing the value of microneedle patch delivery of the seasonal influenza vaccine

BACKGROUND

New vaccine technologies may improve the acceptability, delivery (potentially enabling self-administration), and product efficacy of influenza vaccines. One such technology is the microneedle patch (MNP), a skin delivery technology currently in development. Although MNPs hold promise in preclinical studies, their potential economic and epidemiologic impacts have not yet been evaluated.

METHODS

We utilized a susceptible-exposed-infectious-recovered (SEIR) transmission model linked to an economic influenza outcomes model to assess the economic value of introducing the MNP into the current influenza vaccine market in the United States from the third-party payer and societal perspectives. We also explored the impact of different vaccination settings, self-administration, the MNP price, vaccine efficacy, compliance, and MNP market share. Outcomes included costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), cases, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs; cost/QALY).

RESULTS

With healthcare provider administration, MNP introduction would be cost-effective (ICERs ≤$23,347/QALY) at all MNP price points ($9.50-$30) and market shares (10-60%) assessed, except when compliance and efficacy were assumed to be the same as existing vaccines and the MNP occupied a 10% market share. If MNP self-administration were available (assuming the same efficacy as current technologies), MNP compliance or its efficacy would need to increase by ≥3% in order to be cost-effective (ICERs ≤$1401/QALY), assuming a 2% reduction in administration success with unsupervised self-administration. Under these conditions, MNP introduction would be cost-effective for all price points and market shares assessed.

CONCLUSIONS

When healthcare providers administered the MNP, its introduction would be cost-effective or dominant (i.e., less costly and more effective) in the majority of scenarios assessed. If self-administration were available, MNP introduction would be cost-effective if it increased compliance enough to overcome any decrease in self-administration success or if the MNP presentation afforded an increase in efficacy over current delivery methods for influenza vaccines.

Quantifying the economic value and quality of life impact of earlier influenza vaccination

BACKGROUND

Influenza vaccination is administered throughout the influenza disease season, even as late as March. Given such timing, what is the value of vaccinating the population earlier than currently being practiced?

METHODS

We used real data on when individuals were vaccinated in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, and the following 2 models to determine the value of vaccinating individuals earlier (by the end of September, October, and November): Framework for Reconstructing Epidemiological Dynamics (FRED), an agent-based model (ABM), and FluEcon, our influenza economic model that translates cases from the ABM to outcomes and costs [health care and lost productivity costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)]. We varied the reproductive number (R0) from 1.2 to 1.6.

RESULTS

Applying the current timing of vaccinations averted 223,761 influenza cases, $16.3 million in direct health care costs, $50.0 million in productivity losses, and 804 in QALYs, compared with no vaccination (February peak, R0 1.2). When the population does not have preexisting immunity and the influenza season peaks in February (R0 1.2-1.6), moving individuals who currently received the vaccine after September to the end of September could avert an additional 9634-17,794 influenza cases, $0.6-$1.4 million in direct costs, $2.1-$4.0 million in productivity losses, and 35-64 QALYs. Moving the vaccination of just children to September (R0 1.2-1.6) averted 11,366-1660 influenza cases, $0.6-$0.03 million in direct costs, $2.3-$0.2 million in productivity losses, and 42-8 QALYs. Moving the season peak to December increased these benefits, whereas increasing preexisting immunity reduced these benefits.

CONCLUSION

Even though many people are vaccinated well after September/October, they likely are still vaccinated early enough to provide substantial cost-savings.

Factors associated with seasonal influenza immunization among church-going older African Americans

OBJECTIVES

Churches and faith institutions can frequently influence health behaviors among older African Americans. The church is a centerpiece of spiritual and social life among African American congregants. We explored its influence on influenza immunization coverage during the 2012-2013 influenza season.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted among congregation members ages 50-89 years from six churches in the Atlanta region in 2013-2014. We computed descriptive statistics, bivariate associations, and multivariable models to examine factors associated with immunization uptake among this population.

RESULTS

Of 208 study participants, 95 (45.7%) reported receiving the influenza vaccine. Logistic regression showed that increased trust in their healthcare providers' vaccine recommendations was a positive predictor of vaccination among participants who had not experienced discrimination in a faith-based setting (OR: 14.8 [3.7, 59.8]), but was not associated with vaccination for participants who had experienced such discrimination (OR: 1.5 [0.2, 7.0]). Belief in vaccine-induced influenza illness (OR: 0.1 [0.05, 0.23]) was a negative predictor of influenza vaccination.

CONCLUSION

Members of this older cohort of African Americans who expressed trust in their healthcare providers' vaccine recommendations and disbelief in vaccine-induced influenza were more likely to obtain seasonal influenza immunization. They were also more likely to act on their trust of healthcare provider's vaccine recommendations if they did not encounter negative influenza immunization attitudes within the church. Having healthcare providers address negative influenza immunization attitudes and disseminate vaccine information in a culturally appropriate manner within the church has the potential to enhance future uptake of influenza vaccination.

Cost-effectiveness of programs to eliminate disparities in elderly vaccination rates in the United States

BACKGROUND

There are disparities in influenza and pneumococcal vaccination rates among elderly minority groups and little guidance as to which intervention or combination of interventions to eliminate these disparities is likely to be most cost-effective. Here, we evaluate the cost-effectiveness of four hypothetical vaccination programs designed to eliminate disparities in elderly vaccination rates and differing in the number of interventions.

METHODS

We developed a Markov model in which we assumed a healthcare system perspective, 10-year vaccination program and lifetime time horizon. The cohort was the combined African-American and Hispanic 65 year-old birth cohort in the United States in 2009. We evaluated five different vaccination strategies: no vaccination program and four vaccination programs that varied from "low intensity" to "very high intensity" based on the number of interventions deployed in each program, their cumulative cost and their cumulative impact on elderly minority influenza and pneumococcal vaccination rates.

RESULTS

The very high intensity vaccination program ($24,479/quality-adjusted life year; QALY) was preferred at willingness-to-pay-thresholds of $50,000 and $100,000/QALY and prevented 37,178 influenza cases, 342 influenza deaths, 1,158 invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) cases and 174 IPD deaths over the birth cohort's lifetime. In one-way sensitivity analyses, the very high intensity program only became cost-prohibitive (>$100,000/QALY) at less likely values for the influenza vaccination rates achieved in year 10 of the high intensity (>73.5%) or very high intensity (<76.8%) vaccination programs.

CONCLUSIONS

A practice-based vaccination program designed to eliminate disparities in elderly minority vaccination rates and including four interventions would be cost-effective.

Interventions to increase influenza vaccination rates of those 60 years and older in the community

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of interventions to increase the uptake of influenza vaccination in people aged 60 and older is uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess access, provider, system and societal interventions to increase the uptake of influenza vaccination in people aged 60 years and older in the community.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (2014, Issue 5), MEDLINE (January 1950 to May week 3 2014), EMBASE (1980 to June 2014), AgeLine (1978 to 4 June 2014), ERIC (1965 to June 2014) and CINAHL (1982 to June 2014).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions to increase influenza vaccination uptake in people aged 60 and older.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed study quality and extracted influenza vaccine uptake data.

MAIN RESULTS

This update identified 13 new RCTs; the review now includes a total of 57 RCTs with 896,531 participants. The trials included community-dwelling seniors in high-income countries. Heterogeneity limited meta-analysis. The percentage of trials with low risk of bias for each domain was as follows: randomisation (33%); allocation concealment (11%); blinding (44%); missing data (49%) and selective reporting (100%). Increasing community demand (32 trials, 10 strategies)The interventions with a statistically significant result were: three trials (n = 64,200) of letter plus leaflet/postcard compared to letter (odds ratio (OR) 1.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07 to 1.15); two trials (n = 614) of nurses/pharmacists educating plus vaccinating patients (OR 3.29, 95% CI 1.91 to 5.66); single trials of a phone call from a senior (n = 193) (OR 3.33, 95% CI 1.79 to 6.22), a telephone invitation versus clinic drop-in (n = 243) (OR 2.72, 95% CI 1.55 to 4.76), a free groceries lottery (n = 291) (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.76) and nurses educating and vaccinating patients (n = 485) (OR 152.95, 95% CI 9.39 to 2490.67).We did not pool the following trials due to considerable heterogeneity: postcard/letter/pamphlets (16 trials, n = 592,165); tailored communications (16 trials, n = 388,164); customised letter/phone-call (four trials, n = 82,465) and client-based appraisals (three trials, n = 4016), although several trials showed the interventions were effective. Enhancing vaccination access (10 trials, six strategies)The interventions with a statistically significant result were: two trials (n = 2112) of home visits compared to clinic invitation (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.61); two trials (n = 2251) of free vaccine (OR 2.36, 95% CI 1.98 to 2.82) and one trial (n = 321) of patient group visits (OR 24.85, 95% CI 1.45 to 425.32). One trial (n = 350) of a home visit plus vaccine encouragement compared to a home visit plus safety advice was non-significant.We did not pool the following trials due to considerable heterogeneity: nurse home visits (two trials, n = 2069) and free vaccine compared to no intervention (two trials, n = 2250). Provider- or system-based interventions (17 trials, 11 strategies)The interventions with a statistically significant result were: two trials (n = 2815) of paying physicians (OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.77 to 2.77); one trial (n = 316) of reminding physicians about all their patients (OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.53 to 3.99); one trial (n = 8376) of posters plus postcards (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.86 to 2.22); one trial (n = 1360) of chart review/feedback (OR 3.43, 95% CI 2.37 to 4.97) and one trial (n = 27,580) of educational outreach/feedback (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.81).Trials of posters plus postcards versus posters (n = 5753), academic detailing (n = 1400) and increasing staff vaccination rates (n = 26,432) were non-significant.We did not pool the following trials due to considerable heterogeneity: reminding physicians (four trials, n = 202,264) and practice facilitators (three trials, n = 2183), although several trials showed the interventions were effective. Interventions at the societal level We identified no RCTs of interventions at the societal level.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There are interventions that are effective for increasing community demand for vaccination, enhancing access and improving provider/system response. Heterogeneity limited pooling of trials.

Cost-effectiveness of a program to eliminate disparities in pneumococcal vaccination rates in elderly minority populations: an exploratory analysis

OBJECTIVE

Invasive pneumococcal disease is a major cause of preventable morbidity and mortality in the United States, particularly among the elderly (>65 years). There are large racial disparities in pneumococcal vaccination rates in this population. Here, we estimate the cost-effectiveness of a hypothetical national vaccination intervention program designed to eliminate racial disparities in pneumococcal vaccination in the elderly.

METHODS

In an exploratory analysis, a Markov decision-analysis model was developed, taking a societal perspective and assuming a 1-year cycle length, 10-year vaccination program duration, and lifetime time horizon. In the base-case analysis, it was conservatively assumed that vaccination program promotion costs were $10 per targeted minority elder per year, regardless of prior vaccination status and resulted in the elderly African American and Hispanic pneumococcal vaccination rate matching the elderly Caucasian vaccination rate (65%) in year 10 of the program.

RESULTS

The incremental cost-effectiveness of the vaccination program relative to no program was $45,161 per quality-adjusted life-year gained in the base-case analysis. In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, the likelihood of the vaccination program being cost-effective at willingness-to-pay thresholds of $50,000 and $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained was 64% and 100%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In a conservative analysis biased against the vaccination program, a national vaccination intervention program to ameliorate racial disparities in pneumococcal vaccination would be cost-effective.

Distributional impact of rotavirus vaccination in 25 GAVI countries: estimating disparities in benefits and cost-effectiveness

BACKGROUND

Other studies have demonstrated that the impact and cost effectiveness of rotavirus vaccination differs among countries, with greater mortality reduction benefits and lower cost-effectiveness ratios in low-income and high-mortality countries. This analysis combines the results of a country level model of rotavirus vaccination published elsewhere with data from Demographic and Health Surveys on within-country patterns of vaccine coverage and diarrhea mortality risk factors to estimate within-country distributional effects of rotavirus vaccination. The study examined 25 countries eligible for funding through the GAVI Alliance.

METHODS

For each country we estimate the benefits and cost-effectiveness of vaccination for each wealth quintile assuming current vaccination patterns and for a scenario where vaccine coverage is equalized to the highest quintile's coverage. In the case of India, variations in coverage and risk proxies by state were modeled to estimate geographic distributional effects.

RESULTS

In all countries, rates of vaccination were highest and risks of mortality were lowest in the top two wealth quintiles. However countries differ greatly in the relative inequities in these two underlying variables. Similarly, in all countries examined, the cost-effectiveness ratio for vaccination ($/Disability-Adjusted Life Year averted, DALY) is substantially greater in the higher quintiles (ranging from 2-10 times higher). In all countries, the greatest potential benefit of vaccination was in the poorest quintiles. However, due to reduced vaccination coverage, projected benefits for these quintiles were often lower. Equitable coverage was estimated to result in an 89% increase in mortality reduction for the poorest quintile and a 38% increase overall.

CONCLUSIONS

Rotavirus vaccination is most cost-effective in low-income groups and regions. However in many countries, simply adding new vaccines to existing systems targets investments to higher income children, due to disparities in vaccination coverage. Maximizing health benefits for the poorest children and value for money require increased attention to these distributional effects.

Economic value of influenza vaccination

Influenza epidemics are responsible for high mortality and morbidity rates in particular among elderly and high risk groups. This review is aimed at assessing the economic value of vaccination in these groups. A search of full economic evaluations of influenza vaccination in comparison with no interventions was performed on PubMed from January 1990 to May 2011. Only economic evaluations dealing with elderly and high risk groups were considered. The quality of selected articles was assessed through Drummond's checklist. Sixteen cost-effectiveness analyses and four cost-benefit analyses were included: overall, the quality of studies was fairly good. The vaccination was demonstrated to be cost-effective or cost-saving in almost all studies, independently by the perspective and the type of analysis. Influenza vaccination is a worthwhile intervention from the pharmacoeconomic view-point, anyway a standardization of methods should be desirable in order to guarantee the comparability and transferability of results.