Determinants of costs of human papillomavirus vaccine delivery in six low- and middle-income countries.

Evidence on determinants of vaccine delivery costs can inform program design and planning. Given the dearth of this evidence for human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, we conducted an analysis to identify programmatic and operational factors that are statistically associated with variations in economic costs for HPV vaccine delivery, within and across six low- and middle-income countries. HPV vaccine program operations and cost data were collected from Ethiopia, Guyana, Rwanda, Senegal, Sri Lanka, and Uganda. An ordinary least square regression analysis was done using data from 279 health facilities in these six countries. We ran country-specific and pooled multivariate linear regressions. A conditional regression including 228 facilities was also run. The dependent variable was the estimated total economic costs for HPV vaccine delivery per facility, excluding vaccine procurement costs. Explanatory variables included number of HPV vaccine doses delivered; numbers of vaccination sessions conducted, and schools served; distance traveled by health workers for vaccine delivery; intensity of conducting program activities; human resource (health workers, school staff, etc.) utilization rates; and categorical variables indicating whether per diems were paid, and for country-specific dummies; Explanatory variables such as the number of program activities or meetings held, receipt of per diems, and utilization rates of health workers, were all positively and statistically significantly associated with economic costs in the pooled sample, for both the unconditional and conditional regressions. Variables such as the doses delivered, and number of sessions conducted were statistically significant in the unconditional regression. The within-country regression found that only variations in utilization rates of health workers were statistically significant in all countries. Our analysis provides evidence to HPV vaccination program stakeholders on which program context variables impact costs, which can inform program adjustment to improve cost efficiency, especially as programs managers work to revitalize and rebuild HPV vaccine coverage after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination program in Sri Lanka: Ongoing costs and operational context of a routinized program.

Existing evidence on the cost of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination programs has focused on pilot and demonstration projects or initial introductions, which resulted in a perceived high cost. We aimed to study the ongoing cost and operational context of an established HPV vaccination program in Sri Lanka. We conducted a retrospective operational research and microcosting study focusing on 2019. We collected data from 30 divisional health units, 10 districts, and the central level. We then evaluated financial and economic costs, reported by level of the health system, program activity, cost types, and per dose delivered. In 2019, Sri Lanka delivered a total of 314,815 doses of HPV vaccine. In our study sample, 95 % of the HPV vaccination sessions took place at schools, with peaks of delivery in February-March and September-October. The weighted mean financial cost per dose delivered was $0.27 (95 % confidence interval [CI]: $0.15-$0.39) and the economic cost per dose was $3.88 (95 % CI: $2.67-$5.10), excluding the cost of vaccines and supplies. Most of the cost was borne by the divisional health unit level. Service delivery and social mobilization were major contributors to overall costs at the divisional health unit level, and vaccine collection or distribution and storage were the most costly activities at the district and central levels. Cost drivers included the opportunity cost of health worker and non-health worker time at the divisional health unit level and capital costs for vehicles and equipment, along with fuel, maintenance, and energy, at the district and central levels. This study provides new evidence on the cost and cost drivers of a routinized HPV vaccination program. Results can be used for financial planning purposes in Sri Lanka and may inform other countries as they consider use of HPV vaccines.

Potential health impact and cost-effectiveness of bivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in Afghanistan.

INTRODUCTION: Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination has not been introduced in many countries in South-Central Asia, including Afghanistan, despite the sub-region having the highest incidence rate of cervical cancer in Asia. This study estimates the potential health impact and cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination in Afghanistan to inform national decision-making. METHOD: An Excel-based static cohort model was used to estimate the lifetime costs and health outcomes of vaccinating a single cohort of 9-year-old girls in the year 2018 with the bivalent HPV vaccine, compared to no vaccination. We also explored a scenario with a catch-up campaign for girls aged 10-14 years. Input parameters were based on local sources, published literature, or assumptions when no data was available. The primary outcome measure was the discounted cost per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted, evaluated from both government and societal perspectives. RESULTS: Vaccinating a single cohort of 9-year-old girls against HPV in Afghanistan could avert 1718 cervical cancer cases, 125 hospitalizations, and 1612 deaths over the lifetime of the cohort. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was US$426 per DALY averted from the government perspective and US$400 per DALY averted from the societal perspective. The estimated annual cost of the HPV vaccination program (US$3,343,311) represents approximately 3.53% of the country's total immunization budget for 2018 or 0.13% of total health expenditures. CONCLUSION: In Afghanistan, HPV vaccine introduction targeting a single cohort is potentially cost-effective (0.7 times the GDP per capita of $586) from both the government and societal perspective with additional health benefits generated by a catch-up campaign, depending on the government's willingness to pay for the projected health outcomes.

Incidence and reinfection rates of genital chlamydial infection among women aged 16-24 years attending general practice, family planning and genitourinary medicine clinics in England: a prospective cohort study by the Chlamydia Recall Study Advisory Group.

BACKGROUND: In England, screening for genital chlamydial infection has begun; however, screening frequency for women is not yet determined. AIM: To measure chlamydia incidence and reinfection rates among young women to suggest screening intervals. METHODS: An 18-month prospective cohort study of women aged 16-24 years recruited from general practices, family planning clinics and genitourinary medicine (GUM) clinics: baseline-negative women followed for incidence and baseline-positive women for reinfection; urine tested every 6 months via nucleic acid amplification; and behavioural data collected. Extra test and questionnaire completed 3 months after initial positive test. Factors associated with infection and reinfection investigated using Cox regression stratified by healthcare setting of recruitment. RESULTS: Chlamydia incidence was mean (95% CI) 4.9 (2.7 to 8.8) per 100 person-years (py) among women recruited from general practices, 6.4 (4.2 to 9.8) from family planning clinics and 10.6 (7.4 to 15.2) from GUM clinics. Incidence was associated with young age, history of chlamydial infection and acquisition of new sexual partners. If recently acquiring new partners, condom use at last sexual intercourse was independently associated with lower incidence. Chlamydia reinfection was mean (95% CI) 29.9 (19.7 to 45.4) per 100/person-year from general practices, 22.3 (15.6 to 31.8) from family planning clinics and 21.1 (14.3 to 30.9) from GUM clinics. Factors independently associated with higher reinfection rates were acquisition of new partners and failure to treat all partners. CONCLUSIONS: Sexual behaviours determined incidence and reinfection, regardless of healthcare setting. Our results suggest annual screening of women aged 16-24 years who are chlamydia negative, or sooner if partner change occurs. Rescreening chlamydia-positive women within 6 months of baseline infection may be sensible, especially if partner change occurs or all partners are not treated.