The use of cost-effectiveness analysis for pediatric immunization in developing countries

Use of Utility and Disability Weights in Economic Evaluation of Pediatric Vaccines

OBJECTIVE

To describe how utility weights and disability weights have been used in the context of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs)-based cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of pediatric vaccines for infectious diseases and assess the comparability between weights.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted of CEAs of pediatric vaccines for 16 infectious diseases, published between January 2013 and December 2020 and using QALYs or DALYs as outcome measure. Data on values and sources of weights for the estimation of QALYs and DALYs were extracted from studies and compared across similar health states. Reporting was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement.

RESULTS

Out of 2154 articles identified, 216 CEAs met our inclusion criteria. Of the included studies, 157 used utility weights and 59 used disability weights in their valuation of health states. In QALY studies, the source, background, who's preferences (adults'/children's) were applied and adjustments made to utility weights were poorly reported. In DALY studies, the Global Burden of Disease study was most often referenced. Valuation weights for similar health states varied within QALY studies and between DALY and QALY studies, but no systematic differences were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

This review identified considerable gaps in the way valuation weights are used and reported on in CEA. The nonstandardized use of weights may lead to different conclusions about cost-effectiveness of vaccines and policy decisions.

Cost-effectiveness of a 12 country-intervention to scale up short course TB preventive therapy among people living with HIV

INTRODUCTION

In 2017, the Aurum Institute, with support from Unitaid, launched an initiative to expand short-course therapy for the prevention of tuberculosis (TB) in 12 high-burden countries. This study aimed to investigate the importance of "catalytic" effects beyond the original project timeframe when estimating cost-effectiveness of such large investments.

METHODS

We estimated the cost-effectiveness of the IMPAACT4TB (I4TB) initiative from a health system perspective, using a 10-year time horizon. We first conservatively estimated costs using a "top-down" approach considering only the direct health benefits of providing TB preventive therapy to people initiating antiretroviral therapy (ART) through I4TB activities. We then re-estimated the incremental cost-effectiveness of I4TB incorporating the costs and health benefits of potential catalytic effects beyond the program itself.

RESULTS

We estimated that TB preventive therapy through the I4TB initiative alone would prevent 14 201 cases of active TB and 1562 TB deaths over 10 years with an up-front investment of $52.5 million; the estimated incremental cost-effectiveness was $1580 per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted. If this initiative could achieve its desired catalytic effects, an additional 375 648 cases and 41 321 deaths could be averted, at an incremental cost of $546 million and cost-effectiveness of $713 per DALY averted.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings provide donors with reasonable evidence of value for money to support investment in short-course TB preventive therapy for people initiating ART in high-burden settings. Our study also illustrates the importance of considering long-term secondary ("catalytic") effects when evaluating the cost-effectiveness of large-scale initiatives designed to change a global policy landscape.

Systematic review of the incremental costs of interventions that increase immunization coverage

Achieving and maintaining high vaccination coverage requires investments, but the costs and effectiveness of interventions to increase coverage remain poorly characterized. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to identify peer-reviewed studies published in English that reported interventions aimed at increasing immunization coverage and the associated costs and effectiveness of the interventions. We found limited information in the literature, with many studies reporting effectiveness estimates, but not providing cost information. Using the available data, we developed a cost function to support future programmatic decisions about investments in interventions to increase immunization coverage for relatively low and high-income countries. The cost function estimates the non-vaccine cost per dose of interventions to increase absolute immunization coverage by one percent, through either campaigns or routine immunization. The cost per dose per percent increase in absolute coverage increased with higher baseline coverage, demonstrating increasing incremental costs required to reach higher coverage levels. Future studies should evaluate the performance of the cost function and add to the database of available evidence to better characterize heterogeneity in costs and generalizability of the cost function.

Strategic Planning in Population Health and Public Health Practice: A Call to Action for Higher Education

POLICY POINTS

Scarce resources, especially in population health and public health practice, underlie the importance of strategic planning. Public health agencies' current planning and priority setting efforts are often narrow, at times opaque, and focused on single metrics such as cost-effectiveness. As demonstrated by SMART Vaccines, a decision support software system developed by the Institute of Medicine and the National Academy of Engineering, new approaches to strategic planning allow the formal incorporation of multiple stakeholder views and multicriteria decision making that surpass even those sophisticated cost-effectiveness analyses widely recommended and used for public health planning. Institutions of higher education can and should respond by building on modern strategic planning tools as they teach their students how to improve population health and public health practice.

CONTEXT

Strategic planning in population health and public health practice often uses single indicators of success or, when using multiple indicators, provides no mechanism for coherently combining the assessments. Cost-effectiveness analysis, the most complex strategic planning tool commonly applied in public health, uses only a single metric to evaluate programmatic choices, even though other factors often influence actual decisions.

METHODS

Our work employed a multicriteria systems analysis approach--specifically, multiattribute utility theory--to assist in strategic planning and priority setting in a particular area of health care (vaccines), thereby moving beyond the traditional cost-effectiveness analysis approach.

FINDINGS

(1) Multicriteria systems analysis provides more flexibility, transparency, and clarity in decision support for public health issues compared with cost-effectiveness analysis. (2) More sophisticated systems-level analyses will become increasingly important to public health as disease burdens increase and the resources to deal with them become scarcer.

CONCLUSIONS

The teaching of strategic planning in public health must be expanded in order to fill a void in the profession's planning capabilities. Public health training should actively incorporate model building, promote the interactive use of software tools, and explore planning approaches that transcend restrictive assumptions of cost-effectiveness analysis. The Strategic Multi-Attribute Ranking Tool for Vaccines (SMART Vaccines), which was recently developed by the Institute of Medicine and the National Academy of Engineering to help prioritize new vaccine development, is a working example of systems analysis as a basis for decision support.