Nurses' preferences regarding MenACWY conjugate vaccines attributes: a discrete choice experiment in Spain.

OBJECTIVES: Immunisation against preventable diseases as meningitis is crucial from a public health perspective to face challenges posed by these infections. Nurses hold a great responsibility for these programs, which highlights the importance of understanding their preferences and needs to improve the success of campaigns. This study aimed to investigate nurses' preferences regarding Meningococcus A, C, W, and Y (MenACWY) conjugate vaccines commercialised in Spain. STUDY DESIGN: A national-level discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted. METHODS: A literature review and a focus group informed the DCE design. Six attributes were included: pharmaceutical form, coadministration evidence, shelf-life, package contents, single-doses per package, and package volume. Conditional logit models quantified preferences and relative importance (RI). RESULTS: Thirty experienced primary care nurses participated in this study. Evidence of coadministration with other vaccines was the most important attribute (RI = 43.78%), followed by package size (RI = 22.17%), pharmaceutical form (RI = 19.07%), and package content (RI = 11.80%). There was a preference for evidence of coadministration with routine vaccines (odds ratio [OR] = 2.579, 95% confidence interval [95%CI] = 2.210-3.002), smaller volumes (OR = 1.494, 95%CI = 1.264-1.767), liquid formulations (OR = 1.283, 95%CI = 1.108-1.486) and package contents including only vial/s (OR = 1.283, 95%CI = 1.108-1.486). No statistical evidence was found for the remaining attributes. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence of coadministration with routine vaccines, easy-to-store packages, and fully liquid formulations were drivers of nurses' preferences regarding MenACWY conjugate vaccines. These findings provide valuable insights for decision-makers to optimize current campaigns.

Pathway towards an ideal and sustainable framework agreement for the public procurement of vaccines in Spain: a multi-criteria decision analysis.

Objective: To advance the development of an ideal and sustainable framework agreement for the public procurement of vaccines in Spain, and to agree on the desirable award criteria and their relative weight. Methods: A multidisciplinary committee of seven health-care professionals and managers developed a partial multi-criteria decision analysis to determine the award criteria that should be considered and their specific weights for the public procurement of routine vaccines and seasonal influenza vaccines, considering their legal viability. A re-test of the results was carried out. The current situation was analyzed through 118 tender specifications and compared to the ideal framework. Results: Price is the prevailing award criterion for the public procurement of both routine (weighting of 60% versus 40% for all other criteria) and influenza (36% versus 64%) vaccines. Ideally, 22 criteria should be considered for routine vaccines, grouped and weighted into five domains: efficacy (weighting of 29%), economic aspects (27%), vaccine characteristics (22%), presentation form and packaging (13%), and others (9%). Per criteria set, price was the most important criterion (22%), followed by effectiveness (9%), and composition/formulation (7%). Regarding influenza vaccines, 20 criteria were selected, grouped, and weighted: efficacy (29%), economic aspects (25%), vaccine characteristics (20%), presentation form and packaging (16%), and others (11%). Per criteria set, price was also the most relevant criterion (19%), followed by composition/formulation (8%), and effectiveness (8%). Conclusions: Contrary to the current approach, technical award criteria should prevail over economic criteria in an ideal and sustainable framework agreement for the public procurement of vaccines.