Does the Choice of Health Metric, DALY or QALY, Influence Conclusions of Health Economic Evaluation? A Case Study of Rotavirus Vaccine in Burundi.

BACKGROUND: Two metrics, quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and disability-adjusted life-year (DALY), have been commonly used to measure health benefits associated with health interventions. This study aimed to explore the effect of the choice of health metric (DALY or QALY) on economic evaluation conclusion. METHODS: A previous published model for a cost-utility analysis (CUA) of rotavirus vaccine was adapted to estimate the QALYs gained and DALYs averted from four rotavirus vaccines: Rotarix, RotaTeq, Rotavac, and Rotasiil. The study was conducted in both Burundi provider and societal perspectives over a five-year time horizon. Disability weights (DW) were derived from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study. Scenario analysis was performed to evaluate the impact of age weights and source of utility weight. RESULTS: In base-case analysis, the QALYs gained ranged from 46 to 78% of the DALYs averted. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) per QALY gained were higher than ICER per DALY averted by 28 to 113%, leading to less favorable cost effectiveness. The QALYs gained from using 1-DW as utility weight were slightly higher than those using EQ-5D utility weight obtained from previous literature, yet less likely to alter CUA conclusions. When age-weighting was incorporated in the DALY calculation, the ICERs per DALY averted were reduced leading to more favorable cost effectiveness. CONCLUSION: In case of rotavirus diarrhea, in which mortality burden is considered larger than morbidity due to short duration of disease, although the use of DALY consistently led to more favorable cost-effective result than the use of QALY such effects were considered small and less likely to affect the EE conclusion under current CET of 1 GDP per capita.

Economic analysis for national immunization program planning: A case of rotavirus vaccines in Burundi.

BACKGROUND: In Burundi, diarrhea is the third leading cause of mortality among children under five years of age. This study conducted an economic analysis of rotavirus vaccination program in Burundi. METHODS: A Markov model was constructed to simulate clinical and economic outcomes for the 2019 birth cohort for a period of 5 years. Empirical costing data were collected. ICER per episode averted, ICER per death averted, ICER per DALY averted, net present value, and budget impact were estimated for 4 brands of WHO pre-qualified rotavirus vaccines. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis as well as threshold analysis were performed. RESULTS: For the base case, while all four WHO pre-qualified rotavirus vaccines were cost-effective (ICER < 3 GDP per capita), three of them (i.e. Rotarix, Rotavac and Rotasiil) were very cost-effective (ICER <1 GDP per capita) from both the provider and societal perspectives. The vaccines were still very cost-effective at a price increase of up to US$ 5.09, US$ 3.16, US$ 3.89, and US$ 2.69 for Rotarix, RotaTeq, Rotavac, and Rotasiil, respectively. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated that vaccination programs with Rotarix, RotaTeq, Rotavac, and Rotasiil are cost-effective at a probability of 93.8%, 27%, 99.1%, and 92.7%, respectively. All vaccination programs were cost-beneficial with a net present value in the range of US$ 5,214,912 and US$ 11,135,997.The budget required to run the vaccination program, estimated with break-even prices, ranged between US$ 42,249,498 and US$ 53,487,935 for a 5-year time period. When compared to the GDP of Burundi in 2019, these are are less than 2%. CONCLUSION: The rotavirus vaccine is good value for money. Findings from this study offer evidence on potential economic benefits as well as the required budget for different rotavirus vaccination programs, which could be useful for future planning related to rotavirus vaccine coverage in Burundi after graduation from GAVI.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Community Case Management of Childhood Diarrhea in Burundi.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of community case management (CCM) program of childhood diarrhea by providing oral rehydration salts and zinc through community health workers in Burundi. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis study using a Markov modeling approach was undertaken to assess the CCM program of diarrhea from both provider and societal perspectives. The CCM program was compared with the routine management of childhood diarrhea at health facilities. Primary data on the cost of childhood diarrhea management were collected. Both economic and health outcomes were assessed for a period of 5 years, and a discount rate of 3% was applied. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: The CCM program was found to be both less costly and more effective resulting to a negative value of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, indicating that the program was dominant producing cost savings. Compared with the routine treatment of diarrhea at health facilities, the CCM program would avert 2749 additional disability-adjusted life years over a period of 5 years. The economic burden was reduced of US$1 056 699 and US$2 328 531 from the provider and societal perspectives, respectively. The cost-effectiveness estimates were mostly sensitive to the discount rate and the cost of outpatient visits at health facilities. The intervention remained dominant with a 100% probability of cost savings within 10 000 simulations of the sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Providing inexpensive diarrheal treatment (oral rehydration salts and zinc) in communities is an attractive cost-effective intervention. Evidence from this study should be used to scale up the coverage of this life- and cost-saving intervention.

Economic burden of childhood diarrhea in Burundi.

BACKGROUND: In 2016, diarrhea killed around 7 children aged under 5 years per 1000 live births in Burundi. The objective of this study was to estimate the economic burden associated with diarrhea in Burundi and to examine factors affecting the cost to provide economic evidence useful for the policymaking about clinical management of diarrhea. METHODS: The study was designed as a prospective cost-of-illness study using an incidence-based approach from the societal perspective. The study included patients aged under 5 years with acute non-bloody diarrhea who visited Buyenzi health center and Prince Regent Charles hospital from November to December 2019. Data were collected through interviews with patients' caregivers and review of patients' medical and financial records. Multiple linear regression was performed to identify factors affecting cost, and a cost model was used to generate predictions of various clinical and care management costs. All costs were converted into international dollars for the year 2019. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-eight patients with an average age of 14.45 months were included in this study. Twenty-one percent of the total patients included were admitted. The average total cost per episode of diarrhea was Int$109.01. Outpatient visit and hospitalization costs per episode of diarrhea were Int$59.87 and Int$292, respectively. The costs were significantly affected by the health facility type, patient type, health insurance scheme, complications with dehydration, and duration of the episode before consultation. Our model indicates that the prevention of one case of dehydration results in savings of Int$16.81, accounting for approximately 11 times of the primary treatment cost of one case of diarrhea in the community-based management program for diarrhea in Burundi. CONCLUSION: Diarrhea is associated with a substantial economic burden to society. Evidence from this study provides useful information to support health interventions aimed at prevention of diarrhea and dehydration related to diarrhea in Burundi. Appropriate and timely care provided to patients with diarrhea in their communities and primary health centers can significantly reduce the economic burden of diarrhea. Implementing a health policy to provide inexpensive treatment to prevent dehydration can save significant amount of health expenditure.