Cost-effectiveness of rotavirus vaccination in Albania.

BACKGROUND: Rotavirus vaccines have been introduced in several European countries but can represent a considerable cost, particularly for countries that do not qualify for any external financial support. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of introducing rotavirus vaccination into Albania's national immunization program and to inform national decision-making by improving national capacity to conduct economic evaluations of new vaccines. METHODS: The TRIVAC model was used to assess vaccine impact and cost-effectiveness. The model estimated health and economic outcomes attributed to 10 successive vaccinated birth cohorts (2013-2022) from a government and societal perspective. Epidemiological and economic data used in the model were based on national cost studies, and surveillance data, as well as estimates from the scientific literature. Cost-effectiveness was estimated for both the monovalent (RV1) and pentavalent vaccines (RV5). A multivariate scenario analysis (SA) was performed to evaluate the uncertainty around the incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). RESULTS: With 3% discounting of costs and health benefits over the period 2013-2022, rotavirus vaccination in Albania could avert 51,172 outpatient visits, 14,200 hospitalizations, 27 deaths, 950 disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs), and gain 801 life-years. When both vaccines were compared to no vaccination, the discounted cost per DALY averted was US$ 2008 for RV1 and US$ 5047 for RV5 from a government perspective. From the societal perspective the values were US$ 517 and US$ 3556, respectively. CONCLUSION: From both the perspectives, the introduction of rotavirus vaccine to the Albanian immunization schedule is either cost-effective or highly cost-effective for a range of plausible scenarios. In most scenarios, including the base-case scenario, the discounted cost per DALY averted was less than three times the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. However, rotavirus vaccination was not cost-effective when rotavirus cases and deaths were based on plausible minimum estimates. Introduction of RV1 would yield similar benefits at lower cost.

Evidence-based decision-making for vaccine introductions: Overview of the ProVac International Working Group's experience.

INTRODUCTION: Pan American Health Organization's (PAHO) ProVac Initiative aims to strengthen countries' technical capacity to make evidence-based immunization policy. With financial support from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, PAHO established the ProVac International Working Group (IWG), a platform created for two years to transfer the ProVac Initiative's tools and methods to support decisions in non-PAHO regions. METHODS: In 2011, WHO Regional Offices and partner agencies established the IWG to transfer the ProVac framework for new vaccine decision support, including tools and trainings to other regions of the world. During the two year period, PAHO served as the coordinating secretariat and partner agencies played implementing or advisory roles. RESULTS: Fifty nine national professionals from 17 countries received training on the use of economic evaluations to aid vaccine policy making through regional workshops. The IWG provided direct technical support to nine countries to develop cost-effectiveness analyses to inform decisions. All nine countries introduced the new vaccine evaluated or their NITAGs have made a recommendation to the Ministry of Health to introduce the new vaccine. DISCUSSION: Developing countries around the world are increasingly interested in weighing the potential health impact due to new vaccine introduction against the investments required. During the two years, the ProVac approach proved valuable and timely to aid the national decision making processes, even despite the different challenges and idiosyncrasies encountered in each region. The results of this work suggest that: (1) there is great need and demand for technical support and for capacity building around economic evaluations; and (2) the ProVac method of supporting country-owned analyses is as effective in other regions as it has been in the PAHO region. CONCLUSION: Decision support for new vaccine introduction in low- and middle-income countries is critical to guiding the efficient use of resources and prioritizing high impact vaccination programs.

Strengthening national decision-making on immunization by building capacity for economic evaluation: Implementing ProVac in Europe.

BACKGROUND: For many years, low- and middle-income countries have made efforts to strengthen national decision-making on immunization. The Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) ProVac Initiative was established to help expedite the use of evidence-based decision-making around new vaccine introduction. This initiative provides training in user-friendly cost-effectiveness models and supports the development of country-led economic evaluations. Due to the success of the ProVac Initiative in the Americas, and following requests from countries from outside the Americas, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation funded a two-year pilot effort to expand the initiative to other world regions. Called the ProVac International Working Group (IWG), this endeavor took place in 2012 and 2013. It was coordinated by PAHO and carried out in collaboration with several international partners, including the Agence de Médecine Préventive (AMP), London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM), Program for Appropriate Technology in Health, Sabin Vaccine Institute, United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the World Health Organization (WHO). In the WHO European Region, technical support was provided by AMP, in close collaboration with the WHO Regional Office for Europe and other ProVac IWG partners. METHODS: In 2012, AMP, the WHO Regional Office for Europe, and other partners held a training workshop in Dubrovnik, Croatia, for 31 participants from four countries of the WHO European Region. The aim was to train health professionals in standard methods of economic evaluation and to assess regional demand for economic studies to support decision-making on immunization. AMP and the other organizations also supported four national cost-effectiveness studies in the WHO European Region. The assistance included country visits and support over a period of six months, the establishment of multidisciplinary teams of experts, ongoing training on the TRIVAC decision-support model for new-vaccine economic analysis, review of local evidence, recommending key data inputs, and support in presenting results to national decision makers. RESULTS: National cost-effectiveness studies were conducted in four countries: Albania (rotavirus vaccine [RV]), Azerbaijan (pneumococcal conjugate vaccine [PCV]), Croatia (PCV), and Georgia (PCV). All four countries improved their estimates of the burden of disease preventable by the new vaccines. National advisory bodies and ministries of health obtained economic evidence that helped Albania and Croatia to make decisions on introducing the new vaccines. Azerbaijan and Georgia used economic evidence to confirm previously made preliminary decisions to introduce PCV and make corresponding financial commitments. The study helped Albania to obtain access to affordable prices for rotavirus vaccines through participation in the UNICEF procurement mechanism for middle-income countries. Croatia was able to define the PCV price that would make its introduction cost-effective, and can use this figure as a basis for price negotiations. DISCUSSION: Despite some challenges due to competing national priorities, tight budgets for immunization, and lack of available national data, the ProVac IWG helped to build capacity of national health professionals, support decision-making for the introduction of new vaccines, and promote utilization of economic evidence for making decisions on immunization. This type of strong collaboration among international partners and countries should be scaled up, given that many other countries in the WHO European Region have expressed interest in receiving assistance from the ProVac IWG.

Indicators to assess National Immunization Technical Advisory Groups (NITAGs).

A National Immunization Technical Advisory Group (NITAG) is an expert advisory committee that provides evidence-based recommendations to the Ministry of Health (MoH) to guide immunization programs and policies. The World Health Organization (WHO), the Initiative for Supporting National Independent Immunization and Vaccine Advisory Committees (SIVAC) at Agence de Médecine Préventive (AMP) and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (US CDC) engaged NITAG stakeholders and technical partners in the development of indicators to assess the effectiveness of NITAGs. A list of 17 process, output and outcome indicators was developed and tested in 14 countries to determine whether they were understandable, feasible to collect, and useful for the countries. Based on the findings, a revised version of the indicators is proposed for self-assessment in the countries, as well as for global monitoring of the NITAGs.

Establishment of a National Immunization Technical Advisory Group in Côte d'Ivoire: process and lessons learned.

In January 2010, Côte d'Ivoire became the first GAVI-eligible country in sub-Saharan Africa to establish a National Immunization Technical Advisory Group (NITAG). The Côte d'Ivoire "National Committee of Independent Experts for Vaccination and Vaccines" (CNEIV-CI) was created to strengthen national capacity for evidence-based policy decisions with regard to immunization and vaccines. The primary reasons for success in Côte d'Ivoire were a strong political will, the availability of sufficient national expertise, a step-by-step country-driven process, and the provision of technical assistance to the Ministry of Health. The challenges included operating within the socio-political crisis, and initial reluctance from some stakeholders due to the potential overlap with other existing committees. The latter rapidly dissolved over the course of numerous meetings held with the SIVAC Initiative to clarify the mandate of a NITAG.

The effectiveness of health impact assessment: scope and limitations of supporting decision-making in Europe

Health impact assessment (HIA) is a support tool for intersectoral decision- and policy-making. It is used to assess the potential health consequences of pending decisions and it feeds this information back into the decision-making process. This book provides a detailed map of the use of HIA in the WHO European Region across a large range of sectors, including transport, environment, urban planning and agriculture, and at national, regional and local levels. It also reviews the implementation and institutionalization of HIA with specific focus on governance, financing, resource generation and delivery. HIA’s effectiveness is explored and analysed in 17 case studies using a common analytical approach. This research also identifies the factors that contribute to the effectiveness of HIA. Overall the book demonstrates that HIA can be effective, while also revealing the uneven development and incomplete institutionalization of HIA across Europe. The book is based on a European research project funded under the European Union Public Health Work Programme. The research was led by the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies and included research teams from 19 countries.