RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Our study analyzes the cost-effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccination campaigns in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Mexico, and Peru. METHODS: Using a previously published SVEIR model, we analyzed the impact of a vaccination campaign (2021) from a national healthcare perspective. The primary outcomes were quality adjusted life years (QALYs) lost and total costs. Other outcomes included COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, deaths, and life years. We applied a discount rate of 3% for health outcomes. We modeled a realistic vaccination campaign in each country (the realistic country-specific campaign). Additionally, we assessed a standard campaign (similar, "typical" for all countries), and an optimized campaign (similar in all countries with higher but plausible population coverage). One-way deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed. FINDINGS: Vaccination was health improving as well as cost-saving in almost all countries and scenarios. Our analysis shows that vaccination in this group of countries prevented 573,141 deaths (508,826 standard; 685,442 optimized) and gained 5.07 million QALYs (4.53 standard; 6.03 optimized). Despite the incremental costs of vaccination campaigns, they had a total net cost saving to the health system of US$16.29 billion (US$16.47 standard; US$18.58 optimized). The realistic (base case) vaccination campaign in Chile was the only scenario, which was not cost saving, but it was still highly cost-effective with an ICER of US$22 per QALY gained. Main findings were robust in the sensitivity analyses. INTERPRETATION: The COVID-19 vaccination campaign in seven Latin American and Caribbean countries -that comprise nearly 80% of the region- was beneficial for population health and was also cost-saving or highly cost-effective.
RESUMO
Objetivos: Describir variables epidemiológicas clave durante el año 2020 (pandemia de COVID-19) con respecto a la prevención de la transmisión perinatal (TP) del VIH en Ciudad de Buenos Aires (CABA), comparando con períodos previos.Métodos: Análisis retrospectivo de los datos agregados de TP de las principales maternidades de CABA. El año pandémico (2020) se comparó con los años no pandémicos 2018 y 2019.Resultados: Se observó una reducción del total de nacimientos en 2020 en comparación con 2019 y 2018 (11.640 vs. 14.031 y 15,978, respectivamente). La proporción de nacidos vivos en madres VIH+ (MEV) fue 0,88% en 2020, sin diferencia con 2019 y 2018 (0,94% y 0,93%), p> 0,05 para todas las comparaciones. Entre las MEV, el diagnóstico intraparto fue del 2,9% para 2020, sin diferencias con 2019 (2,25%) y 2018 (9,3%), p> 0,05 (todas las comparaciones); el 8,8% comenzó el tratamiento antirretroviral con > 28 semanas de edad gestacional en 2020 frente al 16% y el 18,05% en 2018 y 2019 (p> 0,05, todas las comparaciones). La prevalencia de la carga viral indetectable en el momento del parto fue del 67% en 2020 frente al 64% en 2018 y del 65,4% en 2019 (p> 0,05, todas las comparaciones). La transmisión perinatal fue 0% en 2020 vs. 1,33% en 2018 y 2,25% 2019 (p> 0,05, todas las comparaciones).Conclusiones: En la primera ola de la pandemia de COVID-19 no se observaron cambios en la proporción de MEV asistidas, diagnóstico intraparto de VIH, inicio tardío del TARV y TP en CABA
Background: To describe key epidemiological variables in 2020 (COVID-19 pandemic) regarding prevention of mother-to-child transmission (MTCT) in Buenos Aires city (CABA) in comparison with previous periods. Methods: Retrospective analysis of aggregated MTCT data was gathered from six principal maternity hospitals in Buenos Aires city. Pandemic year (2020) was compared to non-pandemic years 2018-19 individually considering key epidemiological variables. Results: A reduction of total births was observed in 2020 compared to 2019 and 2018 (11640 vs. 14031 and 15978, respectively). Proportion of live births in HIV-infected women (HPW) was 0.88% in 2020 without difference with 2019 and 2018 (0.94% and 0.93%), p> 0.05 for all comparisons. Among HPW, intrapartum diagnosis was 2.9% for 2020, with no difference between 2019 (2.25%) and 2018 (9.3%), p>0.05 (all comparisons); 8.8% had antiretroviral therapy (ART) started > 28 weeks of gestational age in 2020 vs. 16% and 18.05% in 2018 and 2019 (p> 0.05, all comparisons). Prevalence of undetectable viral load at delivery was 67% in 2020 vs 64% in 2018 and 65.4% in 2019 (p> 0.05, all comparisons). Perinatal transmission was 0% in 2020 vs 1.33% in 2018 and 2.25% 2019 (p> 0.05, all comparisons) Conclusions: In first wave of COVID 19 pandemic no changes in the proportion of HPW assisted, HIV intrapartum diagnosis, late ART initiation and MTCT-rate was observed in CABA
Assuntos
Humanos , Feminino , Planos e Programas de Saúde , Declaração de Nascimento , Fatores Epidemiológicos , Incidência , Estudos Retrospectivos , HIV , Transmissão de Doença Infecciosa/estatística & dados numéricosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, causative agent of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has necessitated widespread lockdown to mitigate the pandemic. This study examines the influence of resilience on the impact of COVID-related stress and enforced lockdown on mental health, drug use, and treatment adherence among people living with HIV (PLWH) in Argentina. SETTING: PLWH residing predominantly in Buenos Aires Metropolitan Area and urban regions of Argentina were identified from a private clinic electronic database. METHODS: Participants completed an anonymous online survey to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on economic disruption, resilience, mental health outcomes (depression, anxiety, stress, and loneliness), adherence to HIV treatment, and substance use. We performed ordinary least squares and logistic regressions to test whether resilient coping buffered the impact of economic disruption on mental health and drug use during quarantine. RESULTS: A total of 1336 PLWH aged 18-82 were enrolled. The impact of economic disruption on mental health ΔF(1,1321) = 8.86, P = 0.003 and loneliness ΔF(1,1326) = 5.77, P = 0.016 was buffered by resilience. A 3-way interaction between resilient buffering, stress, and sex was significant ΔF(1,1325) = 4.76, P = 0.029. Participants reported less than excellent adherence to medication (33%), disruption to mental health services (11%), and disruption to substance abuse treatment (1.3%) during lockdown. DISCUSSION: The impact of COVID-stress and lockdown on emotional distress seemed mitigated by resilience coping strategies, and the buffering impact of resilience on perceived stress was greater among women. Results highlight PLWH's capacity to adhere to treatment in challenging circumstances and the importance of developing resilience skills for better coping with stress and adversity.