What criteria do decision makers in Thailand use to set priorities for vaccine introduction?

A decision-making framework for COVID-19 infodemic management strategies evaluation in spherical fuzzy environment

100 years after the Spanish flu, the COVID-19 crisis showed that large-scale epidemics and pandemics do not belong to the past. On the report of the World Health Organization, COVID-19 is the most significant public health problem of the twenty-first century. Like previous epidemics, the current crisis is accompanied by uncertainty, mistrust, doubt and fear, and this has led to an infodemic connection to the epidemic. So not only are we fighting an epidemic, but also, we are brawling an infodemic. To reduce the social and economic consequences and harmful effects of infodemic health, and to overcome it, we need to implement strategies against infodemic. Evaluating strategies based on multiple characteristics can be considered multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) problem. According to the literature, there is no study that aims on proposing an integrated approach to evaluate infodemic management strategies under uncertain environment. Therefore, in this paper, an integrated framework based on the extended version of best-worst method (BWM) and Combined Compromise Solution (CoCoSo) methods under a spherical fuzzy set (SFS) is developed for the first time to address the COVID-19 infodemic management strategies selection. Initially, the criteria are weighted using the developed SFS BWM which reduces uncertainty in pairwise comparisons. In the next step, the 15 selected strategies are analyzed and ranked using SFS CoCoSo. The outputs of this paper illustrate that online tools for fact checking COVID-19 information and engage and empower communities are placed in the first and second priorities, respectively. The comparison of ranking results SFS-CoCoSo with other MCDM methods demonstrates the performance of the proposed approach and its ranking stability.

WHO's allocation framework for COVAX: is it fair?

The COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access Facility (COVAX) represents an unprecedented global collaboration facilitating the development and distribution of vaccines for COVID-19. COVAX pools and channels funds from state and non-state actors to promising vaccine candidates, and has started to distribute successful candidates to participating states. The WHO, one of the leaders of COVAX, recognised vaccine doses would initially be scarce, and therefore, prepared a two-staged allocation mechanism they considered fair. In the first stage, vaccine doses are distributed equally among participating countries, while in the second stage vaccine doses will be allocated according to a country's need. Ethicists have questioned whether this is the fairest distribution-they argue a country's need should be taken into account from the start and correspondingly, have proposed a framework that treats individuals with equal moral concern, aims to minimise harm and gives priority to the worst-off. In this paper, we seek to explore these concerns by comparing COVAX's allocation mechanism to a targeted allocation based on need. We consider which distribution would more likely maximise well-being and align with principles of equity. We conclude that although in theory, a targeted distribution in proportion to a country's need would be more morally justifiable, when political realities are taken into account, an equal distribution seems more likely to avert a greater number of deaths and reduce disparities.

Social preferences for adopting new vaccines in the national immunization program: A discrete choice experiment

Governments regularly have to decide whether new vaccines should be adopted in their national immunization program. These choices imply complex trade-offs of epidemiological, medical and socio-economic criteria. We investigated how the population in Flanders (Belgium) wants their government to set vaccine-funding priorities. In December 2019, we executed a discrete choice experiment in a sample of the Flemish population (N = 1636). In total, we analysed 16 360 choices between vaccines competing for funding, described in terms of eight characteristics. Using a panel mixed logit model, we quantified the relative importance of each characteristic and investigated differences in preferences across respondent groups. The observed vaccine priorities were different from those that would be identified through cost-effectiveness analysis. People valued the health impact from infectious diseases differently than their weight expressed in QALYs would suggest. Mortality and frequently occurring mild illness were valued higher, whereas lasting morbidity received lower weight. Contribution of the vaccine to disease eradication and uncertainty in vaccine effectiveness were both highly influential factors. Health equity impact was also important whereas the economic impact of the disease did not matter at all. Our results can be used to incorporate public values into vaccine decision-making.

Evaluating Interventions in Response to COVID-19 Outbreak by Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Models

The COVID-19 outbreak has currently led to serious social and economic consequences. In poor and developing countries, there are more challenges and barriers to tackling the pandemic. The study’s aim is to propose a hybrid approach to multiple-criteria decision-making (MCDM) models for determining the most efficient intervention strategies. The methodology is a combination between the Best-Worst Model (BWM) and Group Best-Worst Model (GBWM) to estimate the efficiency score of intervention. Based on the background of knowledge, five groups of stakeholders including Academicians, Entrepreneurs, Commons Residents, Social Workers, Health Workers are considered decision-makers (DMs). A set of nine potential strategies was evaluated and prioritized by all DMs. The findings have shown that different groups of stakeholders prioritized differently the importance of criteria due to their interests. In the context of Vietnam, however, the Availability of Health Systems is prioritized as the most important intervention. The results and proposed model of this paper contributed to MCDM literature as well as a good reference to apply practically in many different countries.

Priority setting of vaccine introduction in Bangladesh: a multicriteria decision analysis study

OBJECTIVE

To prioritise vaccines for introduction in Bangladesh.

METHODS

Multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) process was used to prioritise potential vaccines for introduction in Bangladesh. A set of criteria were identified, weighted and assigned scores by relevant stakeholders (n=14) during workshop A. The performance matrix of the data of vaccines against the criteria set was constructed and validated with the experts (n=6) in workshop B. The vaccines were ranked and appraised by another group of stakeholders (n=10) in workshop C, and the final workshop D involved the dissemination of the findings to decision-makers (n=28).

RESULTS

Five criteria including incidence rate, case fatality rate, vaccine efficacy, size of the population at risk and type of population at risk were used quantitatively to evaluate and to score the vaccines. Two other criteria, cost-effectiveness and outbreak potentiality, were considered qualitatively. On deliberation, the Japanese encephalitis (JE) vaccine was ranked top to be recommended for introduction in Bangladesh.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the MCDA results, JE vaccine is planned to be recommended to the decision-makers for introduction into the national vaccine benefit package. The policymakers support the use of systematic evidence-based decision-making processes such as MCDA for vaccine introduction in Bangladesh, and to prioritise health interventions in the country.

What Is Value in Health and Healthcare? A Systematic Literature Review of Value Assessment Frameworks

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate how value is defined and measured in existing value assessment frameworks (VAFs) in healthcare.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Centre for Reviews and Dissemination from 2008 to 2019. We also performed backward citation chaining of included studies and previously published systematic reviews. Studies reporting the development of a VAF in healthcare were included. For each included framework, we extracted and compared the context, target users, intended use, methods used to identify value attributes, description of the attributes, and attribute scoring approaches.

RESULTS

Of the 8151 articles screened, 57 VAFs were included. The value attributes included in 55 VAFs were grouped into 9 categories: health benefits (n = 53, 96%), affordability (n = 45, 82%), societal impact (n = 42, 76%), burden of disease (n = 36, 65%), quality of evidence (n = 32, 58%), cost-effectiveness (n = 31, 56%), ethics and equity (n = 27, 49%), unmet needs (n = 21, 38%), and innovation (n = 15, 27%). The remaining 2 VAFs used broad attributes or user-defined attributes. Literature review was the main approach to identify value attributes in 36 VAFs. Patient or public was engaged through the development of only 11 VAFs. Weighting has been used to score 29 VAFs, of which 19 used the methods of multicriteria decision analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

There are substantial variations in defining and measuring value. A noticeable weakness of existing VAFs is that patient or public engagement was generally very limited or missing in framework development process. Existing VAFs tend to aggregate multiple value attributes into a single index for decision making.

Identification and prioritization of strategies to tackle COVID-19 outbreak: A group-BWM based MCDM approach

The world is reeling in the midst of the novel coronavirus pandemic with fear of rising toll due to the deadly virus. Decision making during a pandemic outbreak has numerous challenges. Covid19 has become a challenging problem for organizations, countries and the world at large. It is even more complicated when governments and medical care communities are changing their priorities based on the growing challenges and level of effectiveness of measures taken in other countries. In this study, a potential application of a well-known MCDM method called the Group Best-Worst Method is presented to overcome such challenges and draw the strategies to handle COVID19 outbreak. The methodology is applied to rank the 10 identified strategies based on their relative importance provided by multiple groups of stakeholder. These strategies focus on social distancing, medical care, essential commodities, financial support to poor people, public awareness, overall impact of COVID19, digital surveillance of infected or doubtful people, maintaining the economy of the country, and an effect on industries. Furthermore, the local and global weights along with ranking order of strategies are obtained. A sensitivity analysis has also been done to show the change in global weights and ranking order of strategies.

National decision-making for the introduction of new vaccines: A systematic review, 2010-2020

BACKGROUND

Competing priorities make using a transparent and evidence-based approach important when deciding to recommend new vaccines. We conducted a literature review to document the processes and frameworks for national decision-making on new vaccine introductions and explored which key features have evolved since 2010.

METHODS

We searched literature published on policymaking related to vaccine introduction from March 2010 to August 2020 in six databases. We screened articles for eligibility with the following exclusion criteria: non-human or hypothetical vaccines, the sole focus on economic evaluation or decision to adopt rather than policy decision-making. We employed nine broad categories of criteria from the 2012 review for categorization and abstracted data on the country, income level, vaccine, and other relevant criteria.

RESULTS

Of the 3808 unique references screened, 116 met eligibility criteria and were classified as: a) framework of vaccine adoption decision-making (27), b) studies that analyse empirical data on or examples of vaccine adoption decision-making (45), c) theoretical and empirical articles that provide insights into the vaccine policymaking process (44 + 17 already included in the previous categories). Commonly reported criteria for decision-making were the burden of disease; vaccine efficacy/effectiveness, safety; impact on health and non-health outcomes; economic evaluation and cost-effectiveness of alternative interventions. Programmatic and acceptability aspects were not as often considered. Most (50; 82%) of the 61 articles describing the process of vaccine introduction policymaking highlighted the role of country, regional, or global evidence-informed recommendations and a robust national governance as enabling factors for vaccine adoption.

CONCLUSIONS

The literature on vaccine adoption decision-making has expanded since 2010. We found that policymakers and expert advisory committee members (e.g., National Immunization Technical Advisory Group [NITAG]) increasingly value the interventions based on economic evaluations. The results of this review could guide discussions on evidence-informed immunization decision-making among country, sub-regional, and regional stakeholders.

Pneumococcal disease in Thailand

This review examines the epidemiology of pneumococcal disease, serotype prevalence, antibiotic resistance, and national vaccination recommendations in Thailand. The incidence of invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) and annualized hospitalization rates for pneumococcal bacteremia in Thailand were highest in children aged <5years and the elderly. The most prevalent serotype is serotype 6B, which is included in both the 10- and 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCV10 [also known as PHiD-CV] and PCV13, respectively) registered in Thailand. Other common serotypes are 14, 18C, 19F, and 23F (included in both PCVs) and 6A and 19A (only included in PCV13). PCV10/PHiD-CV and PCV13 should cover 48.8%-74% and 73.2%-92% of isolates among children aged ≤5 years, respectively, and 40.0%-47.9% and 58.3%-60.9% of isolates among adults aged ≥65 years. Only PCV13 is licensed for adults in Thailand. Pneumococcal isolates were most commonly resistant to erythromycin, cefuroxime, and penicillin. Despite their demonstrated cost effectiveness and efficacy in reducing nasopharyngeal carriage and IPD, PCVs are not included in the Thai national immunization program. The serotype-specific IPD incidence in Thailand suggests that PCVs will reduce the disease burden in all age groups, but particularly in children and older adults.

Pathway towards an ideal and sustainable framework agreement for the public procurement of vaccines in Spain: a multi-criteria decision analysis

Objective: To advance the development of an ideal and sustainable framework agreement for the public procurement of vaccines in Spain, and to agree on the desirable award criteria and their relative weight. Methods: A multidisciplinary committee of seven health-care professionals and managers developed a partial multi-criteria decision analysis to determine the award criteria that should be considered and their specific weights for the public procurement of routine vaccines and seasonal influenza vaccines, considering their legal viability. A re-test of the results was carried out. The current situation was analyzed through 118 tender specifications and compared to the ideal framework. Results: Price is the prevailing award criterion for the public procurement of both routine (weighting of 60% versus 40% for all other criteria) and influenza (36% versus 64%) vaccines. Ideally, 22 criteria should be considered for routine vaccines, grouped and weighted into five domains: efficacy (weighting of 29%), economic aspects (27%), vaccine characteristics (22%), presentation form and packaging (13%), and others (9%). Per criteria set, price was the most important criterion (22%), followed by effectiveness (9%), and composition/formulation (7%). Regarding influenza vaccines, 20 criteria were selected, grouped, and weighted: efficacy (29%), economic aspects (25%), vaccine characteristics (20%), presentation form and packaging (16%), and others (11%). Per criteria set, price was also the most relevant criterion (19%), followed by composition/formulation (8%), and effectiveness (8%). Conclusions: Contrary to the current approach, technical award criteria should prevail over economic criteria in an ideal and sustainable framework agreement for the public procurement of vaccines.

Evaluation of the COVID-19 Pandemic Intervention Strategies with Hesitant F-AHP

In this study, a hesitant fuzzy AHP method is presented to help decision makers (DMs), especially policymakers, governors, and physicians, evaluate the importance of intervention strategy alternatives applied by various countries for the COVID-19 pandemic. In this research, a hesitant fuzzy multicriteria decision making (MCDM) method, hesitant fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (hesitant F-AHP), is implemented to make pairwise comparison of COVID-19 country-level intervention strategies applied by various countries and determine relative importance scores. An illustrative study is presented where fifteen intervention strategies applied by various countries in the world during the COVID-19 pandemic are evaluated by seven physicians (a professor of infectious diseases and clinical microbiology, an infectious disease physician, a clinical microbiology physician, two internal medicine physicians, an anesthesiology and reanimation physician, and a family physician) in Turkey who act as DMs in the process.

Seroprevalence and factors associated with hepatitis B infection among the hill tribe adult population in Thailand: a cross-sectional study

Background

Hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is one of the greatest public health burdens, particularly for people living with several barriers to access to health care services, such as the hill tribe adult population in Thailand. People aged 25 years and over who are out of the target population for HBV immunization under the national Expanded Program on Immunization (EPI) are at risk of HBV infection. The study aimed to estimate the prevalence and determine the factors associated with HBV infection among hill tribe adults aged 25 years and over living in Chiang Rai Province, Thailand.

Methods

A cross-sectional study design was used to collect information on hill tribe adults aged 25 years and over living in 36 selected hill tribe villages in Chiang Rai Province. All people living in the selected villages who met the criteria were invited to participate in the study. A validated questionnaire and a 5-mL blood specimen were used as research instruments. Hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), antibody to hepatitis B surface (anti-HBs), and antibody to hepatitis B core (anti-HBc) were detected by using the Wondfo Test Kit^@, which has high sensitivity and specificity. Logistic regression was used to detect the associations between variables at the significance level of α = 0.05.

Results

A total of 1491 individuals were recruited into the analysis; 60.8% were females, 81.3% were aged between 30 and 60 years, and 86.0% were married. The majority were illiterate (54.9%), were Buddhist (55.7%), worked in agricultural sectors (87.3%), and had an annual income of less than 50,000 baht per year (72.9%). The overall prevalence of hepatitis B infection was 26.6%; 7.6% were positive for HBsAg, 19.2% were positive for anti-HBs, and 18.9% were positive for anti-HBc. In the multivariate analysis, three variables were found to be associated with hepatitis B infection: those who were in the Yao and Lisu tribes had a 1.64-fold (95% CI = 1.08–2.49) and a 1.93-fold (95% CI = 1.10–3.31) greater chance, respectively, of HBV infection than did those in the Karen tribe; those who were Christian had a 1.41-fold (95% CI = 1.06–1.87) greater chance of HBV infection than did those who were Buddhist; and those who did not use alcohol had a 1.29-fold (95% CI = 1.01–1.65) greater chance of HBV infection than did those who used alcohol.

Conclusions

It is necessary to develop and implement effective public health interventions among hill tribe adult populations who are not part of the EPI-targeted population, particularly Christians, those in the Lisu and Yao tribes, and those who do not use alcohol, to reduce the HBV infection rate, save lives and reduce medical expenses.

Etiology, Treatment, and Outcome of Children Aged 3 to 36 Months With Fever Without a Source at a Community Hospital in Southern Thailand

Background: Fever without a source (FWS) in young children can result from occult bacteremia, urinary tract infection (UTI), meningitis, or certain viral infections. In rural areas of Thailand, where bacterial cultures are not available in some community hospitals, the appropriate examination and management of FWS remain controversial. Methods: We retrospectively searched electronic medical records for medical diagnoses associated with FWS and evaluated the characteristics and clinical courses of children aged 3 to 36 months with FWS who were admitted to a community hospital in southern Thailand between January 2015 and December 2016. Results: Sixty-seven children aged 3 to 36 months with an initial diagnosis of FWS were enrolled. The median age was 11 months (interquartile range [IQR] 8-21 months). Complete blood counts, blood cultures, urine analysis results and urinary cultures were obtained from 67 (100.0%), 31 (46.3%), 47 (70.1%), and 7 (10.5%) patients, respectively. The most common empirical antibiotic administered to these patients was ceftriaxone (71.6%); however, 4 patients recovered without antibiotic administration. The median duration of intravenous antibiotic administration was 4 days (IQR 2-4 days). Intravenous antibiotics were replaced by oral antibiotics in 38 patients (62.3%). The median time to fever subsidence was 30 hours (IQR 12-60 hours). Regarding final diagnoses, 5 patients (7.5%) were diagnosed with culture-confirmed UTI, and 2 (3.0%) had bacteremia (due to contamination). The majority of the children (60, 89.6%) retained the diagnosis of FWS. Presentation at the hospital was significantly earlier in children with culture-confirmed UTI (median 1 day) than in those with culture-negative FWS (median 3 days) (P = .019). Discussion: We evaluated the characteristics and clinical courses of young children with FWS presenting at a community hospital and the treatment approaches utilized by physicians. Although all patients had good prognoses during the study period, we identified several areas for improvement in conducting proper examinations (especially assessments for UTI in children presenting within the first day of fever onset).

Evaluation of Influenza Intervention Strategies in Turkey with Fuzzy AHP-VIKOR

In this study, a fuzzy AHP-VIKOR method is presented to help decision makers (DMs), especially physicians, evaluate and rank intervention strategies for influenza. Selecting the best intervention strategy is a sophisticated multiple criteria decision-making (MCDM) problem with potentially competing criteria. Two fuzzy MCDM methods, fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (F-AHP) and fuzzy VIsekriterijumska optimizacija i KOmpromisno Resenje (F-VIKOR), are integrated to evaluate and rank influenza intervention strategies. In fuzzy AHP-VIKOR, F-AHP is used to determine the fuzzy criteria weights and F-VIKOR is implemented to rank the strategies with respect to the presented criteria. A case study is given where a professor of infectious diseases and clinical microbiology, an internal medicine physician, an ENT physician, a family physician, and a cardiologist in Turkey act as DMs in the process.

Criteria Used for Priority-Setting for Public Health Resource Allocation in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aimed to identify criteria being used for priority setting for resource allocation decisions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Furthermore, the included studies were analyzed from a policy perspective to understand priority setting processes in these countries.

METHODS

Searches were carried out in PubMed, Embase, Econlit, and Cochrane databases, supplemented with pre-identified Web sites and bibliographic searches of relevant papers. Quality appraisal of included studies was undertaken. The review protocol is registered in International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews PROSPERO CRD42017068371.

RESULTS

Of 16,412 records screened by title and abstract, 112 papers were identified for full text screening and 44 studies were included in the final analysis. At an overall level, cost-effectiveness 52 percent (n = 22) and health benefits 45 percent (n = 19) were the most cited criteria used for priority setting for public health resource allocation. Inter-region (LMICs) and between various approaches (like health technology assessment, multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA), accountability for reasonableness (AFR) variations among criteria were also noted. Our review found that MCDA approach was more frequently used in upper middle-income countries and AFR in lower-income countries for priority setting in health. Policy makers were the most frequently consulted stakeholders in all regions.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Priority-setting criteria for health resource allocation decisions in LMICs largely comprised of cost-effectiveness and health benefits criteria at overall level. Other criteria like legal and regulatory framework conducive for implementation, fairness/ethics, and political considerations were infrequently reported and should be considered.

The health-economic studies of HPV vaccination in Southeast Asian countries: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

The cervical cancer-related burden is an important problem in Southeast Asian (SEA) countries. However, only 3 out of 11 countries implement the comprehensive prevention program. Areas covered: This is a retrospective review from all relevant studies until 2015 from two main databases, MEDLINE/Pubmed and Embase in order to provide an evidence on the health economics of HPV vaccination in the region. Expert commentary: The implementation of HPV vaccination will generate substantial health and economic benefit in SEA countries since the number of cervical cancer cases in this region are generally high. Therefore, a clear recommendation on how HPV vaccination should be implemented in a country, for example on how many doses will be used, how much cost is required or is it a school based- or clinical based-delivery, is critically required.