Assessing the Cost-Utility of Universal Hepatitis B Vaccination Among Adults.

BACKGROUND: Although effective against hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, hepatitis B (HepB) vaccination is only recommended for infants, children, and adults at higher risk. We conducted an economic evaluation of universal HepB vaccination among US adults. METHODS: Using a decision analytic model with Markov disease progression, we compared current vaccination recommendations (baseline) with either 3-dose or 2-dose universal HepB vaccination (intervention strategies). In simulated modeling of 1 million adults distributed by age and risk groups, we quantified health benefits (quality-adjusted life years, QALYs) and costs for each strategy. Multivariable probabilistic sensitivity analyses identified key inputs. All costs reported in 2019 US dollars. RESULTS: With incremental base-case vaccination coverage up to 50% among persons at lower risk and 0% increment among persons at higher risk, each of 2 intervention strategies averted nearly one-quarter of acute HBV infections (3-dose strategy, 24.8%; 2-dose strategy, 24.6%). Societal incremental cost per QALY gained of $152 722 (interquartile range, $119 113-$235 086) and $155 429 (interquartile range, $120 302-$242 226) were estimated for 3-dose and 2-dose strategies, respectively. Risk of acute HBV infection showed the strongest influence. CONCLUSIONS: Universal adult vaccination against HBV may be an appropriate strategy for reducing HBV incidence and improving resulting health outcomes.

Assessing the cost-utility of preferentially administering Heplisav-B vaccine to certain populations.

Vaccination is the primary strategy to prevent hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection in the United States. Prior to 2017, most standard hepatitis B vaccine schedules required 3 doses over 6 months. Heplisav-B, approved in 2017, is administered in 2 doses over a 1 month time period but has a higher per-dose cost ($115.75 per dose compared to $57.25 per Engerix-B dose, costs as of June 1, 2019). We aimed to assess the cost-utility of providing the two-dose Heplisav-B vaccine compared to a three-dose Engerix-B vaccine among adult populations currently recommended for vaccination against hepatitis B. We used a decision-tree model with microsimulation and a Markov disease progression process to assess the cost-utility separately for the following populations: adults with diabetes, obesity, chronic kidney disease, HIV; non-responders to previous hepatitis B vaccination; older adults; and persons who inject drugs (PWID). We modeled epidemiologic outcomes (incident HBV infections, sequelae and related deaths), costs (2019 USD) and benefits (quality-adjusted life years, QALYs) and compared them across strategies. Sensitivity analyses assessed the cost-utility at varying estimates of Heplisav-B efficacy. In the base case scenario for each population, vaccination with Heplisav-B resulted in fewer HBV infections (37.5-59.8% averted), sequelae, and HBV-related deaths (36.3-71.4% averted). Heplisav-B resulted in decreased costs and increased benefits compared to Engerix-B for all populations except non-responders. Incremental costs from the baseline strategy ranged from $4746.78 saved (PWID) to $14.15 added cost (non-responders). Incremental benefits per person ranged from 0.00005 QALYs (older adults) to 0.7 QALYs (PWID). For persons with HIV and PWID, Heplisav-B resulted in lower costs and increased benefits in all scenarios in which Heplisav-B series efficacy was at least 80%. Vaccination using Heplisav-B is a cost-saving strategy compared to Engerix-B for adults with diabetes, chronic kidney disease, obesity, and HIV; older adults; and PWID.

Short-Term Effects and Long-Term Cost-Effectiveness of Universal Hepatitis C Testing in Prenatal Care.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the clinical effects and cost-effectiveness of universal prenatal hepatitis C screening, and to calculate potential life expectancy, quality of life, and health care costs associated with universal prenatal hepatitis C screening and linkage to treatment. METHODS: Using a stochastic individual-level microsimulation model, we simulated the lifetimes of 250 million pregnant women matched at baseline with the U.S. childbearing population on age, injection drug use behaviors, and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection status. Modeled outcomes included hepatitis C diagnosis, treatment and cure, lifetime health care costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALY) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios comparing universal prenatal hepatitis C screening to current practice. We modeled whether neonates exposed to maternal HCV at birth were identified as such. RESULTS: Pregnant women with hepatitis C infection lived 1.21 years longer and had 16% lower HCV-attributable mortality with universal prenatal hepatitis C screening, which had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $41,000 per QALY gained compared with current practice. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios remained below $100,000 per QALY gained in most sensitivity analyses; notable exceptions included incremental cost-effectiveness ratios above $100,000 when assuming mean time to cirrhosis of 70 years, a cost greater than $500,000 per false positive diagnosis, or population HCV infection prevalence below 0.16%. Universal prenatal hepatitis C screening increased identification of neonates exposed to HCV at birth from 44% to 92%. CONCLUSIONS: In our model, universal prenatal hepatitis C screening improves health outcomes in women with HCV infection, improves identification of HCV exposure in neonates born at risk, and is cost-effective.

Hepatitis B Virus Testing and Care among Pregnant Women Using Commercial Claims Data, United States, 2011-2014.

Introduction: Pregnant women should receive hepatitis B virus (HBV) testing with hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), but it is unclear whether HBV-infected pregnant women are linked to care. Methods: We analyzed MarketScan™ commercial insurance claims. We included pregnant women, aged 10-50 years, with 42 weeks of continuous enrollment before (predelivery) and 6 months after (postdelivery) the first delivery claim for each unique pregnancy between 1/1/2011 and 6/30/2014. We identified claims for HBsAg testing by CPT code and described the care continuum among pregnancies with an associated ICD-9 HBV diagnosis code by demographic and clinical characteristics, including HBV-directed care ([HBV DNA or hepatitis B e antigen] and ALT test codes) and antiviral treatment (claims for tenofovir, entecavir, lamivudine, adefovir, or telbivudine) pre- and postdelivery. Results: There were 870,888 unique pregnancies (819,752 women) included. Before delivery, 714,830 (82%) pregnancies had HBsAg test claims, but this proportion decreased with subsequent pregnancies (p < 0.0001): second (80%), third (71%), and fourth (61%). We identified 1,190 (0.14%) pregnancies with an associated HBV diagnosis code: most were among women aged ≥ 30 years (76%) residing in the Pacific (34%) or Middle Atlantic (18%) regions. Forty-two percent of pregnancies with an HBV diagnosis received HBV-directed care (42% predelivery and 39% postdelivery). Antiviral treatment was initiated before delivery in 128 (13%) of 975 pregnancies and postdelivery in 16 (1.6%) pregnancies. Conclusions: While most of these commercially insured pregnant women received predelivery HBV screening, we identified gaps in HBV testing and the HBV care continuum which highlight potential targets for public health interventions.

Cost Analysis of Single-Dose Hepatitis B Revaccination Among Infants Born to Hepatitis B Surface Antigen-Positive Mothers and Not Responding to the Initial Vaccine Series.

OBJECTIVES: Infants born to mothers who are hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) positive are at risk for perinatal hepatitis B infection. As prevention, these infants receive a series of 3 or 4 doses of hepatitis B vaccine starting at birth and postvaccination serologic testing. Infants with antibody levels <10 mIU/mL are considered vaccine nonresponders and should be revaccinated. The objective of this cost analysis was to assess a single-dose revaccination strategy among infant nonresponders. METHODS: We used a decision analytic tree to compare the costs of a single-dose revaccination strategy with the costs of a 3-dose revaccination strategy. The analysis consisted of 3 epidemiologic scenarios that varied levels of previous protection among infants indicated for revaccination. We assumed health outcomes in each strategy were the same, and we evaluated costs from the societal perspective using 2016 US dollars. We conducted sensitivity analyses on key variables, including the minimum required efficacy of a single revaccination dose. RESULTS: In all analyses, the single-dose revaccination strategy was a lower-cost option than the 3-dose revaccination strategy. Under the assumption that all revaccination visits were previously unscheduled, single-dose revaccination reduced the cost per infant by $119.81 to $155.72 (depending on the scenario). Across all scenarios, the most conservative estimate for the threshold efficacy (the minimum efficacy required to result in a lower-cost option) value of single-dose revaccination was 67%. CONCLUSIONS: For infants who were born to HBsAg-positive mothers and who were not responding to the initial vaccine series, a single-dose revaccination strategy, compared with a 3-dose revaccination strategy, reduced costs across several scenarios. These results helped inform the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices' vote in February 2017 to recommend single-dose revaccination.

Hepatitis B Vaccination, Screening, and Linkage to Care: Best Practice Advice From the American College of Physicians and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Background: Vaccination, screening, and linkage to care can reduce the burden of chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection. However, recommendations vary among organizations, and their implementation has been suboptimal. The American College of Physicians' High Value Care Task Force and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention developed this article to present best practice statements for hepatitis B vaccination, screening, and linkage to care. Methods: A narrative literature review of clinical guidelines, systematic reviews, randomized trials, and intervention studies on hepatitis B vaccination, screening, and linkage to care published between January 2005 and June 2017 was conducted. Best Practice Advice 1: Clinicians should vaccinate against hepatitis B virus (HBV) in all unvaccinated adults (including pregnant women) at risk for infection due to sexual, percutaneous, or mucosal exposure; health care and public safety workers at risk for blood exposure; adults with chronic liver disease, end-stage renal disease (including hemodialysis patients), or HIV infection; travelers to HBV-endemic regions; and adults seeking protection from HBV infection. Best Practice Advice 2: Clinicians should screen (hepatitis B surface antigen, antibody to hepatitis B core antigen, and antibody to hepatitis B surface antigen) for HBV in high-risk persons, including persons born in countries with 2% or higher HBV prevalence, men who have sex with men, persons who inject drugs, HIV-positive persons, household and sexual contacts of HBV-infected persons, persons requiring immunosuppressive therapy, persons with end-stage renal disease (including hemodialysis patients), blood and tissue donors, persons infected with hepatitis C virus, persons with elevated alanine aminotransferase levels (≥19 IU/L for women and ≥30 IU/L for men), incarcerated persons, pregnant women, and infants born to HBV-infected mothers. Best Practice Advice 3: Clinicians should provide or refer all patients identified with HBV (HBsAg-positive) for posttest counseling and hepatitis B-directed care.

Hepatitis B Surface Antigen Testing Among Pregnant Women, United States 2014.

BACKGROUND: Post-exposure prophylaxis administered to infants shortly after birth prevents approximately 90% of cases of perinatal hepatitis B virus (HBV) transmission. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommends that all pregnant women be tested for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) at an early prenatal visit during each pregnancy to detect active infection with HBV. This study sought to determine the proportion and characteristics of pregnant women tested\not tested according to Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommendations. METHODS: We analyzed MarketScan databases to assess prenatal HBsAg testing among women with commercial and Medicaid health care coverage according to demographic and clinical characteristics. Pregnant women 15-44 years of age continuously enrolled in a health plan in the MarketScan database during 2013 and 2014 and with a live birth in 2014 were included. RESULTS: Among commercially insured women, 239,955 (87.7%) received HBsAg testing and 59.6% were tested during their first trimester. Among Medicaid-enrolled women, 57,268 (83.6%) received HBsAg testing and 39.4% were tested during their first trimester. Among women with high risk pregnancies, HBsAg testing occurred in 87.3% of those with commercial insurance and 84.8% with Medicaid. Testing also varied by maternal age; among women with commercial insurance, testing was greatest among women 26-44 years of age, and among women with Medicaid, testing was greatest among younger women (15-25 years). Testing was lowest among women residing in the Northeast (commercial insurance only). CONCLUSIONS: Prenatal HBsAg testing identifies HBV-infected pregnant women so their infants can receive timely immunoprophylaxis. Efforts to optimize HBsAg testing among all pregnant women are needed to further prevent perinatal HBV transmission.

Cost-effectiveness of active-passive prophylaxis and antiviral prophylaxis during pregnancy to prevent perinatal hepatitis B virus infection.

UNLABELLED: In an era of antiviral treatment, reexamination of the cost-effectiveness of strategies to prevent perinatal hepatitis B virus (HBV) transmission in the United States is needed. We used a decision tree and Markov model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of the current U.S. strategy and two alternatives: (1) Universal hepatitis B vaccination (HepB) strategy: No pregnant women are screened for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg). All infants receive HepB before hospital discharge; no infants receive hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG). (2) Current strategy: All pregnant women are screened for HBsAg. Infants of HBsAg-positive women receive HepB and HBIG ≤12 hours of birth. All other infants receive HepB before hospital discharge. (3) Antiviral prophylaxis strategy: All pregnant women are screened for HBsAg. HBsAg-positive women have HBV-DNA load measured. Antiviral prophylaxis is offered for 4 months starting in the third trimester to women with DNA load ≥10(6) copies/mL. HepB and HBIG are administered at birth to infants of HBsAg-positive women, and HepB is administered before hospital discharge to infants of HBsAg-negative women. Effects were measured in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). Compared to the universal HepB strategy, the current strategy prevented 1,006 chronic HBV infections and saved 13,600 QALYs (ICER: $6,957/QALY saved). Antiviral prophylaxis dominated the current strategy, preventing an additional 489 chronic infections, and saving 800 QALYs and $2.8 million. The results remained robust over a wide range of assumptions. CONCLUSION: The current U.S. strategy for preventing perinatal HBV remains cost-effective compared to the universal HepB strategy. An antiviral prophylaxis strategy was cost saving compared to the current strategy and should be considered to continue to decrease the burden of perinatal hepatitis B in the United States.

Cost-effectiveness of ensuring hepatitis B protection for previously vaccinated healthcare personnel.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the cost-effectiveness of pre- and postexposure approaches for ensuring hepatitis B protection among previously vaccinated healthcare personnel (HCP). DESIGN: A decision-analytic model was developed for alternative strategies of ensuring hepatitis B protection under assumptions of 68% and 95% long-term protection after a primary vaccination series. Costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) lost from infections were estimated, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated relative to a no intervention alternative over 10 years of intervention. Separate analyses were performed for trainees and nontrainees, using the healthcare system perspective. Trainees face higher risk of exposure and likely received primary vaccination as infants. SETTING: General healthcare settings. PARTICIPANTS: Trainee and nontrainee HCP. INTERVENTIONS: Preexposure testing for antibody to hepatitis B surface antigen followed by additional vaccination for HCP without protective antibody levels; postexposure evaluation and management for HCP reporting blood or body fluid exposures RESULTS: The preexposure strategy prevents more infections and has higher costs than the postexposure strategy or no intervention. For trainees, 10-year preexposure evaluation ICERs are $832,875 and $144,457 per QALY for 95% and 68% long-term vaccine protection, respectively. Trainee 10-year postexposure evaluation ICERs are $1,146,660 and $191,579 per QALY under the 95% and 68% long-term protection assumptions, respectively. For nontrainees, 10-year ICERs are $745,739 and $1,129,286 per QALY for the preexposure and postexposure evaluation strategies, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: ICERs may inform decision makers as they decide whether the added cost of the preexposure strategy provides sufficient value in preventing infections.

Cost-effectiveness of testing hepatitis B-positive pregnant women for hepatitis B e antigen or viral load.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of testing pregnant women with hepatitis B (hepatitis B surface antigen [HBsAg]-positive) for hepatitis B e antigen (HBeAg) or hepatitis B virus (HBV) DNA, and administering maternal antiviral prophylaxis if indicated, to decrease breakthrough perinatal HBV transmission from the U.S. health care perspective. METHODS: A Markov decision model was constructed for a 2010 birth cohort of 4 million neonates to estimate the cost-effectiveness of two strategies: testing HBsAg-positive pregnant women for 1) HBeAg or 2) HBV load. Maternal antiviral prophylaxis is given from 28 weeks of gestation through 4 weeks postpartum when HBeAg is positive or HBV load is high (10 copies/mL or greater). These strategies were compared with the current recommendation. All neonates born to HBsAg-positive women received recommended active-passive immunoprophylaxis. Effects were measured in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and all costs were in 2010 U.S. dollars. RESULTS: The HBeAg testing strategy saved $3.3 million and 3,080 QALYs and prevented 486 chronic HBV infections compared with the current recommendation. The HBV load testing strategy cost $3 million more than current recommendation, saved 2,080 QALYs, and prevented 324 chronic infections with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $1,583 per QALY saved compared with the current recommendations. The results remained robust over a wide range of assumptions. CONCLUSION: Testing HBsAg-positive pregnant women for HBeAg or HBV load followed by maternal antiviral prophylaxis if HBeAg-positive or high viral load to reduce perinatal hepatitis B transmission in the United States is cost-effective.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of the national Perinatal Hepatitis B Prevention Program.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the cost-effectiveness of the national Perinatal Hepatitis B Prevention Program (PHBPP) over the lifetime of the 2009 US birth cohort and compare the costs and outcomes of the program to a scenario without PHBPP support. PHBPP's goals are to ensure all infants born to hepatitis B (HepB) surface antigen-positive women receive timely postexposure prophylaxis, complete HepB vaccine series, and obtain serologic testing after series completion. METHODS: A decision analytic tree and a long-term Markov model represented the risk of perinatal and childhood infections under different prevention alternatives, and the long-term health and economic consequences of HepB infection. Outcome measures were the number of perinatal infections and childhood infections from infants born to HepB surface antigen-positive women, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), lifetime costs, and incremental cost per QALY gained. The health outcomes and total costs of each strategy were compared incrementally. Costs were evaluated from the health care system perspective and expressed in US dollars at a 2010 price base. RESULTS: In all analyses, the PHBPP increased QALYs and led to higher reductions in the number of perinatal and childhood infections than no PHBPP, with a cost-effectiveness ratio of $2602 per QALY. In sensitivity analyses, the cost-effectiveness ratio was robust to variations in model inputs, and there were instances where the program was both more effective and cost saving. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicated that the current PHBPP represents a cost-effective use of resources, and ensuring the program reaches all pregnant women could present additional public health benefits.

Cost-effectiveness of hepatitis B vaccination in adults with diagnosed diabetes.

OBJECTIVE To examine the cost-effectiveness of a hepatitis B vaccination program for unvaccinated adults with diagnosed diabetes in the U.S. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We used a cost-effectiveness simulation model to estimate the cost-effectiveness of vaccinating adults 20-59 years of age with diagnosed diabetes not previously vaccinated for or infected by hepatitis B virus (HBV). The model estimated acute and chronic HBV infections, complications, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. Data sources included surveillance data, epidemiological studies, and vaccine prices. RESULTS With a 10% uptake rate, the intervention will vaccinate 528,047 people and prevent 4,271 acute and 256 chronic hepatitis B infections. Net health care costs will increase by $91.4 million, and 1,218 QALYs will be gained, producing a cost-effectiveness ratio of $75,094 per QALY gained. Results are most sensitive to age, the discount rate, the hepatitis B incidence ratio for people with diabetes, and hepatitis B infection rates. Cost-effectiveness ratios rise with age at vaccination; an alternative intervention that vaccinates adults with diabetes 60 years of age or older had a cost-effectiveness ratio of $2.7 million per QALY. CONCLUSIONS Hepatitis B vaccination for adults with diabetes 20-59 years of age is modestly cost-effective. Vaccinating older adults with diabetes is not cost-effective. The study did not consider hepatitis outbreak investigation costs, and limited information exists on hepatitis progression among older adults with diabetes. Partly based on these results, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recently recommended hepatitis B vaccination for people 20-59 years of age with diagnosed diabetes.

Infection control assessment of ambulatory surgical centers.

CONTEXT: More than 5000 ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs) in the United States participate in the Medicare program. Little is known about infection control practices in ASCs. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) piloted an infection control audit tool in a sample of ASC inspections to assess facility adherence to recommended practices. OBJECTIVE: To describe infection control practices in a sample of ASCs. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: All State Survey Agencies were invited to participate. Seven states volunteered; 3 were selected based on geographic dispersion, number of ASCs each state committed to inspect, and relative cost per inspection. A stratified random sample of ASCs was selected from each state. Sample size was based on the number of inspections each state estimated it could complete between June and October 2008. Sixty-eight ASCs were assessed; 32 in Maryland, 16 in North Carolina, and 20 in Oklahoma. Surveyors from CMS, trained in use of the audit tool, assessed compliance with specific infection control practices. Assessments focused on 5 areas of infection control: hand hygiene, injection safety and medication handling, equipment reprocessing, environmental cleaning, and handling of blood glucose monitoring equipment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of facilities with lapses in each infection control category. RESULTS: Overall, 46 of 68 ASCs (67.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 55.9%-77.9%) had at least 1 lapse in infection control; 12 of 68 ASCs (17.6%; 95% CI, 9.9%-28.1%) had lapses identified in 3 or more of the 5 infection control categories. Common lapses included using single-dose medication vials for more than 1 patient (18/64; 28.1%; 95% CI, 18.2%-40.0%), failing to adhere to recommended practices regarding reprocessing of equipment (19/67; 28.4%; 95% CI, 18.6%-40.0%), and lapses in handling of blood glucose monitoring equipment (25/54; 46.3%; 95% CI, 33.4%-59.6%). CONCLUSION: Among a sample of US ASCs in 3 states, lapses in infection control were common.

To ask or not to ask?: The results of a formative assessment of a video empowering patients to ask their health care providers to perform hand hygiene.

OBJECTIVES: To formatively evaluate the Hand Hygiene Saves Lives video and explore the perceptions and expectations of health care providers and laypersons regarding hand hygiene (HH), health care-associated infections, and patient empowerment using the Health Belief Model as a framework. METHODS: Four focus groups were conducted in February 2008 among laypersons (n = 18) and health care providers (n = 17). Qualitative data were coded for themes, and quantitative Likert scales ranging from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very) were analyzed using SPSS. RESULTS: Health care-associated infections were perceived to be somewhat common (mean, 3.4) and HH as very important (mean, 4.9). Laypersons reported being significantly more likely to ask their nurses (2.5 versus 4.3; P = 0.001) and physicians (3.3 versus 4.3; P = 0.010) to perform HH after viewing the video. The video's target audience was perceived to be families (42.0%) or patients (39.1%) and the message to be the importance of HH (45.5%) or creating comfort about asking (24.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Empowering patients using tools such as a video may be an important patient safety advance to improve HH in health care settings and prevent health care-associated infections.