Gharpure R, Chard AN, Cabrera Escobar M, Zhou W, Valleau MM, Yau TS, Bresee JS, Azziz-Baumgartner E, Pallas SW, Lafond KE. Costs and cost-effectiveness of influenza illness and vaccination in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review from 2012 to 2022.
PLoS Med 2024;
21:e1004333. [PMID:
38181066 PMCID:
PMC10802964 DOI:
10.1371/journal.pmed.1004333]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/01/2023] [Revised: 01/22/2024] [Accepted: 12/13/2023] [Indexed: 01/07/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Historically, lack of data on cost-effectiveness of influenza vaccination has been identified as a barrier to vaccine use in low- and middle-income countries. We conducted a systematic review of economic evaluations describing (1) costs of influenza illness; (2) costs of influenza vaccination programs; and (3) vaccination cost-effectiveness from low- and middle-income countries to assess if gaps persist that could hinder global implementation of influenza vaccination programs.
METHODS AND FINDINGS
We performed a systematic search in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and Scopus in January 2022 and October 2023 using a combination of the following key words: "influenza" AND "cost" OR "economic." The search included studies with publication years 2012 through 2022. Studies were eligible if they (1) presented original, peer-reviewed findings on cost of illness, cost of vaccination program, or cost-effectiveness of vaccination for seasonal influenza; and (2) included data for at least 1 low- or middle-income country. We abstracted general study characteristics and data specific to each of the 3 study types. Of 54 included studies, 26 presented data on cost-effectiveness, 24 on cost-of-illness, and 5 on program costs. Represented countries were classified as upper-middle income (UMIC; n = 12), lower-middle income (LMIC; n = 7), and low-income (LIC; n = 3). The most evaluated target groups were children (n = 26 studies), older adults (n = 17), and persons with chronic medical conditions (n = 12); fewer studies evaluated pregnant persons (n = 9), healthcare workers (n = 5), and persons in congregate living settings (n = 1). Costs-of-illness were generally higher in UMICs than in LMICs/LICs; however, the highest national economic burden, as a percent of gross domestic product and national health expenditure, was reported from an LIC. Among studies that evaluated the cost-effectiveness of influenza vaccine introduction, most (88%) interpreted at least 1 scenario per target group as either cost-effective or cost-saving, based on thresholds designated in the study. Key limitations of this work included (1) heterogeneity across included studies; (2) restrictiveness of the inclusion criteria used; and (3) potential for missed influenza burden from use of sentinel surveillance systems.
CONCLUSIONS
The 54 studies identified in this review suggest an increased momentum to generate economic evidence about influenza illness and vaccination from low- and middle-income countries during 2012 to 2022. However, given that we observed substantial heterogeneity, continued evaluation of the economic burden of influenza illness and costs/cost-effectiveness of influenza vaccination, particularly in LICs and among underrepresented target groups (e.g., healthcare workers and pregnant persons), is needed. Use of standardized methodology could facilitate pooling across settings and knowledge sharing to strengthen global influenza vaccination programs.
Collapse