1
|
Chang E, Li H, Zheng W, Zhou L, Jia Y, Gu W, Cao Y, Zhu X, Xu J, Liu B, You M, Liu K, Wang M, Huang W. Economic Evaluation of COVID-19 Immunization Strategies: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis. APPLIED HEALTH ECONOMICS AND HEALTH POLICY 2024; 22:457-470. [PMID: 38598091 DOI: 10.1007/s40258-024-00880-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/17/2024] [Indexed: 04/11/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES This study aimed to systematically assess global economic evaluation studies on COVID-19 vaccination, offer valuable insights for future economic evaluations, and assist policymakers in making evidence-based decisions regarding the implementation of COVID-19 vaccination. METHODS Searches were performed from January 2020 to September 2023 across seven English databases (PubMed, Web of Science, MEDLINE, EBSCO, KCL-Korean Journal Dataset, SciELO Citation Index, and Derwent Innovations Index) and three Chinese databases (Wanfang Data, China Science and Technology Journal, and CNKI). Rigorous inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied. Data were extracted from eligible studies using a standardized data collection form, with the reporting quality of these studies assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 (CHEERS 2022). RESULTS Of the 40 studies included in the final review, the overall reporting quality was good, evidenced by a mean score of 22.6 (ranging from 10.5 to 28). Given the significant heterogeneity in fundamental aspects among the studies reviewed, a narrative synthesis was conducted. Most of these studies adopted a health system or societal perspective. They predominantly utilized a composite model, merging dynamic and static methods, within short to medium-term time horizons to simulate various vaccination strategies. The research strategies varied among studies, investigating different doses, dosages, brands, mechanisms, efficacies, vaccination coverage rates, deployment speeds, and priority target groups. Three pivotal parameters notably influenced the evaluation results: the vaccine's effectiveness, its cost, and the basic reproductive number (R0). Despite variations in model structures, baseline parameters, and assumptions utilized, all studies identified a general trend that COVID-19 vaccination is cost-effective compared to no vaccination or intervention. CONCLUSIONS The current review confirmed that COVID-19 vaccination is a cost-effective alternative in preventing and controlling COVID-19. In addition, it highlights the profound impact of variables such as dose size, target population, vaccine efficacy, speed of vaccination, and diversity of vaccine brands and mechanisms on cost effectiveness, and also proposes practical and effective strategies for improving COVID-19 vaccination campaigns from the perspective of economic evaluation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Enxue Chang
- School of Health Management, Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China
| | - Haofei Li
- School of Health Management, Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China
| | - Wanji Zheng
- School of Health Management, Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China
| | - Lan Zhou
- School of Health Management, Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China
| | - Yanni Jia
- School of Health Management, Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China
| | - Wen Gu
- School of Health Management, Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China
| | - Yiyin Cao
- School of Health Management, Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China
| | - Xiaoying Zhu
- School of Elderly Care Services and Management, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
- Nossal Institute for Global Health, School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
| | - Juan Xu
- Cancer Hospital Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Shenzhen Center, Shenzhen, China
| | - Bo Liu
- Shenzhen Health Capacity Building and Continuing Education Center, Shenzhen, China
| | - Mao You
- National Health Development Research Center, Beijing, 100191, China
| | - Kejun Liu
- National Health Development Research Center, Beijing, 100191, China.
| | - Mingsi Wang
- School of Health Management, Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China.
| | - Weidong Huang
- School of Health Management, Harbin Medical University, Harbin, China.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Chen LH, Hui VKY, Lai YCV, Xu RH, Guo Y. University Students' Vaccination Intention after the Fifth Wave of the COVID-19 Outbreak in Hong Kong: Inspiration from a Health Belief Model. Healthcare (Basel) 2024; 12:1204. [PMID: 38921318 PMCID: PMC11203942 DOI: 10.3390/healthcare12121204] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/01/2024] [Revised: 05/29/2024] [Accepted: 06/12/2024] [Indexed: 06/27/2024] Open
Abstract
The fifth wave of COVID-19, driven by the Omicron variant, started to surge in Hong Kong in December 2021. Previous studies have shown that younger adults, compared to older adults, are vulnerable to increased risks of side effects after vaccination. However, little is known about the COVID-19 vaccination behavior among younger adults, especially university students, in Hong Kong. Therefore, the present online survey study aimed to investigate the predictors of COVID-19 vaccination intention among university students in Hong Kong using the Health Belief Model (HBM) as a framework. Two other potential predictors, the previous influenza vaccine uptake frequency and the Hong Kong SAR government vaccination lottery program, were also examined. The intention to receive another dose of the COVID-19 vaccine was low (36.4%). Multivariate binomial logistic regression analysis showed that, after controlling for demographic and baseline characteristics, the perceived susceptibility (OR = 2.98, CI = 1.18-7.53) and previous influenza vaccine uptake frequency (OR = 1.54, CI = 1.08-2.19) significantly and positively predicted the COVID-19 vaccination intention. However, the government vaccination lottery program (i.e., wining prizes for being vaccinated) (OR = 0.87, CI = 0.34-2.26) was not a significant motivator of COVID-19 vaccination. Future public health campaigns should focus on the individual susceptibility to COVID-19 and past influenza vaccination history to promote increased vaccination uptake among university students.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lu Hua Chen
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong SAR, China; (Y.-C.V.L.); (R.H.X.)
- Research Institute for Smart Ageing (RISA), The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong SAR, China
- Mental Health Research Center (MHRC), The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong SAR, China
| | | | - Yi-Ching Victoria Lai
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong SAR, China; (Y.-C.V.L.); (R.H.X.)
| | - Richard Huan Xu
- Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong SAR, China; (Y.-C.V.L.); (R.H.X.)
| | - Yingqi Guo
- Department of Social Work, Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong SAR, China;
- Department of Geography (Joint), Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong SAR, China
- Smart Society Lab., Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong SAR, China
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Zeinab D, Shahin N, Fateme M, Saeed BF. Economic evaluation of vaccination against COVID-19: A systematic review. Health Sci Rep 2024; 7:e1871. [PMID: 38332928 PMCID: PMC10850437 DOI: 10.1002/hsr2.1871] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/02/2023] [Revised: 10/13/2023] [Accepted: 01/15/2024] [Indexed: 02/10/2024] Open
Abstract
Background and Aims Coronavirus has burdened considerable expenditures on the different health systems. Vaccination programs, the critical solution against pandemic diseases, are known as safe and effective interventions to prevent and control epidemics. We aimed to perform a systematic review to provide economic evidence of the value of different types of vaccines available to combat the Covid-19 to all health policymakers worldwide. Methods Electronic searches conducted on Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, and other economic evaluation databases. Related and published articles searched up to March 2022 by using keywords such as "Vaccination," "Covid-19," "Cost-benefit," "Cost-utility," "Cost-effectiveness," "Economic Assessment," and "Economic evaluation." Followed by choosing the most suitable articles according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, data captured and the results extracted. The quality assessment of the articles performed by the checklist of CHEERS 2022. Finally, 13 articles included in the review. Results All messenger RNA vaccines were dominant with approximately 70% coverage against no vaccination in the primary vaccination program except in one study that looked at booster effects. From a payer's perspective, a dollar invested in a vaccine would be less profitable than from a societal perspective. Therefore, primary mass vaccination can be considered a cost-effective intervention in primary vaccination to save more lives and produce more positive externalities. However, the cost-benefit ratio for all vaccines increases when statistical lifetime value and global economic and educational disadvantages are considered. Conclusion The COVID-19 primary vaccination programs in regional outbreaks, from a long-term perspective, will demonstrate substantial cost-effectiveness. It is suggested that due to the positive externalities of vaccination, primary mass vaccination, with the help of COVAX-19TM, could be considered a reliable way to combat viral epidemics compared to the loss of individual lives and economic and educational disturbances around the world.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dolatshahi Zeinab
- Department of Health Policy, School of Health Management and Information SciencesIran University of Medical SciencesTehranIran
| | - Nargesi Shahin
- Department of Health Management and Economics, Faculty of HealthIlam University of Medical SciencesIlamIran
| | - Mezginejad Fateme
- Department of Hematology, School of Allied Medicine, Cellular and Molecular Research CenterBirjand University of Medical SciencesBirjanIran
| | - Bagheri Faradonbeh Saeed
- Department of Health Services Management, School of HealthAhvaz Jundishapur University of Medical ScienceAhvazIran
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Espinosa O, Mora L, Sanabria C, Ramos A, Rincón D, Bejarano V, Rodríguez J, Barrera N, Álvarez-Moreno C, Cortés J, Saavedra C, Robayo A, Franco OH. Predictive models for health outcomes due to SARS-CoV-2, including the effect of vaccination: a systematic review. Syst Rev 2024; 13:30. [PMID: 38229123 PMCID: PMC10790449 DOI: 10.1186/s13643-023-02411-1] [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: 12/12/2022] [Accepted: 12/04/2023] [Indexed: 01/18/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The interaction between modelers and policymakers is becoming more common due to the increase in computing speed seen in recent decades. The recent pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus was no exception. Thus, this study aims to identify and assess epidemiological mathematical models of SARS-CoV-2 applied to real-world data, including immunization for coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19). METHODOLOGY PubMed, JSTOR, medRxiv, LILACS, EconLit, and other databases were searched for studies employing epidemiological mathematical models of SARS-CoV-2 applied to real-world data. We summarized the information qualitatively, and each article included was assessed for bias risk using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) and PROBAST checklist tool. The PROSPERO registration number is CRD42022344542. FINDINGS In total, 5646 articles were retrieved, of which 411 were included. Most of the information was published in 2021. The countries with the highest number of studies were the United States, Canada, China, and the United Kingdom; no studies were found in low-income countries. The SEIR model (susceptible, exposed, infectious, and recovered) was the most frequently used approach, followed by agent-based modeling. Moreover, the most commonly used software were R, Matlab, and Python, with the most recurring health outcomes being death and recovery. According to the JBI assessment, 61.4% of articles were considered to have a low risk of bias. INTERPRETATION The utilization of mathematical models increased following the onset of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Stakeholders have begun to incorporate these analytical tools more extensively into public policy, enabling the construction of various scenarios for public health. This contribution adds value to informed decision-making. Therefore, understanding their advancements, strengths, and limitations is essential.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Oscar Espinosa
- Directorate of Analytical, Economic and Actuarial Studies in Health, Instituto de Evaluación Tecnológica en Salud (IETS) & Economic Models and Quantitative Methods Research Group, Centro de Investigaciones para el Desarrollo, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, D.C., Colombia.
| | - Laura Mora
- Directorate of Analytical, Economic and Actuarial Studies in Health, Instituto de Evaluación Tecnológica en Salud (IETS), Bogotá, Colombia
| | - Cristian Sanabria
- Directorate of Analytical, Economic and Actuarial Studies in Health, Instituto de Evaluación Tecnológica en Salud (IETS), Bogotá, Colombia
| | - Antonio Ramos
- Directorate of Analytical, Economic and Actuarial Studies in Health, Instituto de Evaluación Tecnológica en Salud (IETS) & Economic Models and Quantitative Methods Research Group, Centro de Investigaciones para el Desarrollo, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, D.C., Colombia
| | - Duván Rincón
- Directorate of Analytical, Economic and Actuarial Studies in Health, Instituto de Evaluación Tecnológica en Salud (IETS), Bogotá, Colombia
| | - Valeria Bejarano
- Directorate of Analytical, Economic and Actuarial Studies in Health, Instituto de Evaluación Tecnológica en Salud (IETS) & Economic Models and Quantitative Methods Research Group, Centro de Investigaciones para el Desarrollo, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, D.C., Colombia
| | - Jhonathan Rodríguez
- Directorate of Analytical, Economic and Actuarial Studies in Health, Instituto de Evaluación Tecnológica en Salud (IETS) & Economic Models and Quantitative Methods Research Group, Centro de Investigaciones para el Desarrollo, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, D.C., Colombia
| | - Nicolás Barrera
- Directorate of Analytical, Economic and Actuarial Studies in Health, Instituto de Evaluación Tecnológica en Salud (IETS), Bogotá, Colombia
| | | | - Jorge Cortés
- Faculty of Medicine, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, D.C., Colombia
| | - Carlos Saavedra
- Faculty of Medicine, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, D.C., Colombia
| | - Adriana Robayo
- Directorate of Analytical, Economic and Actuarial Studies in Health, Instituto de Evaluación Tecnológica en Salud (IETS), Bogotá, Colombia
| | - Oscar H Franco
- University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University & Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Cambridge, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Yeung KHT, Kim E, Yap WA, Pathammavong C, Franzel L, Park YL, Cowley P, Griffiths UK, Hutubessy RCW. Estimating the delivery costs of COVID-19 vaccination using the COVID-19 Vaccine Introduction and deployment Costing (CVIC) tool: the Lao People's Democratic Republic experience. BMC Med 2023; 21:248. [PMID: 37424001 PMCID: PMC10332011 DOI: 10.1186/s12916-023-02944-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/26/2023] [Accepted: 06/15/2023] [Indexed: 07/11/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The COVID-19 Vaccine Introduction and deployment Costing (CVIC) tool was developed to assist countries to estimate incremental financial costs to roll out COVID-19 vaccines. This article describes the purposes, assumptions and methods used in the CVIC tool and presents the estimated financial costs of delivering COVID-19 vaccines in the Lao People's Democratic Republic (Lao PDR). METHODS From March to September 2021, a multidisciplinary team in Lao PDR was involved in the costing exercise of the National Deployment and Vaccination Plan for COVID-19 vaccines to develop potential scenarios and gather inputs using the CVIC tool. Financial costs of introducing COVID-19 vaccines for 3 years from 2021 to 2023 were projected from the government perspective. All costs were collected in 2021 Lao Kip and presented in United States dollar. RESULTS From 2021 to 2023, the financial cost required to vaccinate all adults in Lao PDR with primary series of COVID-19 vaccines (1 dose for Ad26.COV2.S (recombinant) vaccine and 2 doses for the other vaccine products) is estimated to be US$6.44 million (excluding vaccine costs) and additionally US$1.44 million and US$1.62 million to include teenagers and children, respectively. These translate to financial costs of US$0.79-0.81 per dose, which decrease to US$0.6 when two boosters are introduced to the population. Capital and operational cold-chain costs contributed 15-34% and 15-24% of the total costs in all scenarios, respectively. 17-26% went to data management, monitoring and evaluation, and oversight, and 13-22% to vaccine delivery. CONCLUSIONS With the CVIC tool, costs of five scenarios were estimated with different target population and booster dose use. These facilitated Lao PDR to refine their strategic planning for COVID-19 vaccine rollout and to decide on the level of external resources needed to mobilize and support outreach services. The results may further inform inputs in cost-effectiveness or cost-benefit analyses and potentially be applied and adjusted in similar low- and middle-income settings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Karene Hoi Ting Yeung
- Department of Immunization, Vaccines and Biologicals, World Health Organization, 20, Avenue Appia, 1211, Geneva 27, Switzerland
| | - Eunkyoung Kim
- World Health Organization, Lao People's Democratic Republic, 125 Saphanthong Road, Unit5, Ban Saphanthongtai, Sisattanak District, P.O.Box 343, Vientiane Capital, Lao People's Democratic Republic
| | - Wei Aun Yap
- Quanticlear Solutions Sdn. Bhd, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
| | - Chansay Pathammavong
- Mother and Child Health Center, National Immunization Programme, Ministry of Health, Vientiane Capital, Lao People's Democratic Republic
| | - Lauren Franzel
- Department of Immunization, Vaccines and Biologicals, World Health Organization, 20, Avenue Appia, 1211, Geneva 27, Switzerland
| | - Yu Lee Park
- World Health Organization, Lao People's Democratic Republic, 125 Saphanthong Road, Unit5, Ban Saphanthongtai, Sisattanak District, P.O.Box 343, Vientiane Capital, Lao People's Democratic Republic
| | - Peter Cowley
- Department of Health Governance and Financing, World Health Organization, 20, Avenue Appia, 1211, Geneva 27, Switzerland
| | | | - Raymond Christiaan W Hutubessy
- Department of Immunization, Vaccines and Biologicals, World Health Organization, 20, Avenue Appia, 1211, Geneva 27, Switzerland.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Fu Y, Zhao J, Han P, Zhang J, Wang Q, Wang Q, Wei X, Yang L, Ren T, Zhan S, Li L. Cost-effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination: A systematic review. J Evid Based Med 2023. [PMID: 37186130 DOI: 10.1111/jebm.12525] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/19/2022] [Accepted: 03/17/2023] [Indexed: 05/17/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The COVID-19 vaccination strategy has been widely used to protect population health worldwide. This study aims to summarize the cost-effectiveness evidence of economic evaluation of COVID-19 vaccination strategies to provide evidence supporting the usage of COVID-19 vaccination, especially where the supply of COVID-19 vaccine is limited. METHODS A systematic literature review was performed by searching both English and Chinese databases, including PubMed, Embase, Science Direct, Web of Science, Medline, Scopus, and CNKI. Articles published from January 1, 2020 to August 1, 2022 (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42022355442). RESULTS Of the 1035 papers identified, a total of 28 English studies that met the preset criteria were included. COVID-19 vaccination and booster vaccination were cost-effective or cost-saving regardless of the vaccine type; vaccine efficacy, vaccine price, vaccine supply or prioritization, and vaccination pace were the influential factors of cost-effectiveness among different population groups. When supply is adequate, mass vaccination should be encouraged, while when supply is inadequate, prioritizing the high risk and the elderly is more cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS COVID-19 vaccination strategies are economically favorable in a wide range of countries and population groups, and further research on suitable strategies for booster COVID-19 vaccination is needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yaqun Fu
- Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China
| | - Jingyu Zhao
- Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China
| | - Peien Han
- Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China
| | - Jiawei Zhang
- Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China
| | - Quan Wang
- Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China
- Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis MO, U.S., St. Louis, United States
| | - Qingbo Wang
- Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China
| | - Xia Wei
- Department of Health Services Research and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK
| | - Li Yang
- Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China
| | - Tao Ren
- School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China
| | - Siyan Zhan
- Department of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China
| | - Liming Li
- Department of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing, China
- Peking University Center for Public Health and Epidemic Preparedness and Response, Beijing, China
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Zhou H, Ding N, Han X, Zhang H, Liu Z, Jia X, Yu J, Zhang W. Cost-effectiveness analysis of vaccination against COVID-19 in China. Front Public Health 2023; 11:1037556. [PMID: 36960359 PMCID: PMC10027744 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1037556] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2022] [Accepted: 02/03/2023] [Indexed: 03/09/2023] Open
Abstract
Introduction Since September 2020, Chinese populations aged > 3 years have been encouraged to receive a two-dose inoculation with vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the current vaccination strategy amongst the general population in mainland China from a societal perspective. Methods In this study, we construct a decision tree with Markov models to compare the economic and health consequences of the current vaccination strategy versus a no-vaccination scenario, over a time horizon of one year and an annual discount rate of 5%. Transition probabilities, health utilities, healthcare costs, and productivity losses are estimated from literature. Outcome measures include infection rates, death rates, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) is then calculated to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the current vaccination strategy, and both one-way deterministic sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) are applied to assess the impact of uncertainties on results. Results Our simulation indicates that compared with a no-vaccination scenario, vaccination amongst the general population in mainland China would reduce the infection rate from 100% to 45.3% and decrease the death rate from 6.8% to 3.1%. Consequently, the strategy will lead to a saving of 37,664.77 CNY (US$5,256.70) and a gain of 0.50 QALYs per person per year on average (lifetime QALY and productivity loss due to immature death are included). The cost-saving for each QALY gain is 74,895.69 CNY (US$10,452.85). Result of the PSA indicates that vaccination is the dominating strategy with a probability of 97.9%, and the strategy is cost-effective with a probability of 98.5% when the willingness-to-pay (WTP) is 72,000 CNY (US$10,048.71) per QALY. Conclusion Compared with a no-vaccination scenario, vaccination among the general population in mainland China is the dominating strategy from a societal perspective. The conclusion is considered robust in the sensitivity analyses.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Huixuan Zhou
- Department of Physical Fitness and Health, School of Sport Science, Beijing Sport University, Beijing, China
- Key Laboratory of Exercise and Physical Fitness, Ministry of Education, Beijing Sport University, Beijing, China
| | - Ningxin Ding
- School of Government, Wellington School of Business and Government, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand
| | - Xueyan Han
- School of Health Policy and Management, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China
| | - Hanyue Zhang
- School of Physical Education, North East Normal University, Jilin City, China
| | - Zeting Liu
- Department of Mathematic Science, School of Sport Engineering, Beijing Sport University, Beijing, China
| | - Xiao Jia
- Key Laboratory of Exercise and Physical Fitness, Ministry of Education, Beijing Sport University, Beijing, China
| | - Jingjing Yu
- Key Laboratory of Exercise and Physical Fitness, Ministry of Education, Beijing Sport University, Beijing, China
| | - Wei Zhang
- Department of Chemical Drug Control, China National Institute for Food and Drug Control, Beijing, China
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Utami AM, Rendrayani F, Khoiry QA, Noviyanti D, Suwantika AA, Postma MJ, Zakiyah N. Economic evaluation of COVID-19 vaccination: A systematic review. J Glob Health 2023; 13:06001. [PMID: 36637810 PMCID: PMC9838689 DOI: 10.7189/jogh.13.06001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/14/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Safe 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. Methods We 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. Results We 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%. Conclusions Given 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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Auliasari Meita Utami
- Department of Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia
| | - Farida Rendrayani
- Department of Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia
| | - Qisty Aulia Khoiry
- Department of Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia
| | - Dita Noviyanti
- Department of Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia
| | - Auliya A Suwantika
- Department of Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia,Center of Excellence for Pharmaceutical Care Innovation, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia
| | - Maarten J Postma
- Center of Excellence for Pharmaceutical Care Innovation, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia,Department of Health Sciences, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands,Department of Economics, Econometrics & Finance, University of Groningen, Faculty of Economics & Business, Groningen, the Netherlands
| | - Neily Zakiyah
- Department of Pharmacology and Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia,Center of Excellence for Pharmaceutical Care Innovation, Universitas Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia
| |
Collapse
|