Guaranteed Cash Incentives Boosted COVID-19 Vaccinations Of Young Adults: Evidence From West Virginia.

Guaranteed small cash incentives were widely employed by policy makers during the COVID-19 vaccination campaign, but the impact of these programs has been largely understudied. We were the first to exploit a statewide natural experiment of one such program implemented in West Virginia in 2021 that provided a $100 incentive to fully vaccinated adults ages 16-35. Using individual-level data from the Census Bureau's Household Pulse Survey, we isolated the policy effect through a difference-in-discontinuities design that exploited the discontinuity in incentive eligibility at age thirty-five. We found that the $100 incentive was associated with a robust increase in the proportion of people ever vaccinated against COVID-19 and the proportion who completed or intended to complete the primary series of COVID-19 vaccines. The policy effects were also likely to be more pronounced among people with low incomes, those who were unemployed, and those with no prior COVID-19 infection. The guaranteed cash incentive program may have created more equitable access to vaccines for disadvantaged populations. Additional outreach may also be needed, especially to unvaccinated people with prior COVID-19 infections.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine for routine pediatric vaccination programs in Japan.

BACKGROUND: The Japanese National Immunization Program currently includes the pediatric 13 valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) to prevent pneumococcal infections. We aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of 20-valent PCV (PCV20) as a pediatric vaccine versus PCV13. METHODS: A decision-analytic Markov model was used to estimate expected costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and prevented cases and deaths caused by invasive pneumococcal disease, pneumonia, and acute otitis media over a ten-year time horizon from the societal and healthcare payer perspectives. RESULTS: PCV20 was dominant, i.e. less costly and more effective, over PCV13 (gained 294,599 QALYs and reduced Japanese yen [JPY] 352.6 billion [2.6 billion United States dollars, USD] from the societal perspective and JPY 178.9 billion [USD 1.4 billion] from the payer perspective). Sensitivity and scenario analyses validated the robustness of the base scenario results. When comparing PCV20 with PCV13, the threshold analysis revealed an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio that was within the threshold value (JPY 5 million/QALY) at a maximum acquisition cost of JPY 74,033 [USD 563] (societal perspective) and JPY 67,758 [USD 515] (payer perspective). CONCLUSIONS: As a pediatric vaccine, PCV20 was dominant over PCV13 regardless of the study perspective.

An economic evaluation and incremental analysis of the cost effectiveness of three universal childhood varicella vaccination strategies for Ireland.

BACKGROUND: The cost effectiveness of childhood varicella vaccination is uncertain, as evidenced by variation in national health policies. Within the European Economic Area (EEA), only 10 of 30 countries offer universally funded childhood varicella vaccination. This study estimates the cost effectiveness of universal childhood varicella vaccination for one EEA country (Ireland), highlighting the difference in cost effectiveness between alternative vaccination strategies. METHODS: An age-structured dynamic transmission model, simulating varicella zoster virus transmission, was developed to analyse the impact of three vaccination strategies; one-dose at 12 months old, two-dose at 12 and 15 months old (short-interval), and two-dose at 12 months and five years old (long-interval). The analysis adopted an 80-year time horizon and considered payer and societal perspectives. Clinical effectiveness was based on cases of varicella and subsequently herpes zoster and post-herpetic neuralgia avoided, and outcomes were expressed in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Costs were presented in 2022 Irish Euro and cost effectiveness was interpreted with reference to a willingness-to-pay threshold of €20,000 per QALY gained. RESULTS: From the payer perspective, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for a one-dose strategy, compared with no vaccination, was estimated at €8,712 per QALY gained. The ICER for the next least expensive strategy, two-dose long-interval, compared with one-dose, was estimated at €45,090 per QALY gained. From a societal perspective, all three strategies were cost-saving compared with no vaccination; the two-dose short-interval strategy dominated, yielding the largest cost savings and health benefits. Results were stable across a range of sensitivity and scenario analyses. CONCLUSION: A one-dose strategy was highly cost effective from the payer perspective, driven by a reduction in hospitalisations. Two-dose strategies were cost saving from the societal perspective. These results should be considered alongside other factors such as acceptability of a new vaccine within the overall childhood immunisation schedule, programme objectives and budget impact.

Analyzing the dynamics of meningococcal vaccinations initiatives by local government units in Poland (2017-2021) - Scope, challenges and recommendations.

INTRODUCTION: Meningococcal vaccinations are recommended by Polish public health authorities but lack coverage under health insurance, prompting Local Government Units (LGUs) to implement local health policy programs. This study examines the effectiveness and impact of LGU-driven meningococcal vaccination initiatives in Poland between 2017 and 2021. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis utilized data from reports on local public health interventions submitted annually to the Ministry of Health in Poland. The study focused on the number of meningococcal vaccination programs, their scope, the vaccinated population, and associated program costs. Additionally, nationwide data on meningococcal disease incidence and vaccine uptake were analyzed. RESULTS: Within LGUs programs, 48,617 individuals received meningococcal vaccinations, constituting approximately 10% of all vaccinations in Poland during the study period. Notably, cities with poviat rights spearheaded programs covering 54% of the total participants. The total cost incurred by these initiatives amounted to EUR 2,553,661. CONCLUSIONS: While LGUs activities positively contributed to increased meningococcal vaccination rates, the overall engagement of local governments remains limited. The findings underscore the importance of expanding local government involvement in meningococcal vaccination programs to address public health needs effectively. Improved collaboration and increased funding may enhance the reach and impact of these initiatives.

Evaluating the health and economic outcomes of a PCV15 vaccination program for adults aged 65 years-and-above in Switzerland.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the health and economic outcomes of a PCV13 or PCV15 age-based (65 years-and-above) vaccination program in Switzerland. INTERVENTIONS: The three vaccination strategies examined were:Target population: All adults aged 65 years-and-above. Perspective(s): Switzerland health care payer. TIME HORIZON: 35 years. Discount rate: 3.0%. Costing year: 2023 Swiss Francs (CHF). STUDY DESIGN: A static Markov state-transition model. DATA SOURCES: Published literature and publicly available databases or reports. OUTCOME MEASURES: Pneumococcal diseases (PD) i.e., invasive pneumococcal diseases (IPD) and non-bacteremic pneumococcal pneumonia (NBPP); total quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), total costs and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (CHF/QALY gained). RESULTS: Using an assumed coverage of 60%, the PCV15 strategy prevented a substantially higher number of cases/deaths than the PCV13 strategy when compared to the No vaccination strategy (1,078 IPD; 21,155 NBPP; 493 deaths). The overall total QALYs were 10,364,620 (PCV15), 10,364,070 (PCV13), and 10,362,490 (no vaccination). The associated overall total costs were CHF 741,949,814 (PCV15), CHF 756,051,954 (PCV13) and CHF 698,329,579 (no vaccination). Thus, the PCV13 strategy was strongly dominated by the PCV15 strategy. The ICER of the PCV15 strategy (vs. no vaccination) was CHF 20,479/QALY gained. In two scenario analyses where the vaccine effectiveness for serotype 3 were reduced (75% to 39.3% for IPD; 45% to 23.6% for NBPP) and NBPP incidence was increased (from 1,346 to 1,636/100,000), the resulting ICERs were CHF 29,432 and CHF 13,700/QALY gained, respectively. The deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses demonstrated the robustness of the qualitative results-the estimated ICERs for the PCV15 strategy (vs. No vaccination) were all below CHF 30,000/QALYs gained. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate that using PCV15 among adults aged 65 years-and-above can prevent a substantial number of PD cases and deaths while remaining cost-effective over a range of inputs and scenarios.

Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analysis of PPV23 vaccination for the Malaysian Hajj pilgrims.

The potential occurrence of disease outbreaks during the hajj season is of great concern due to extreme congestion in a confined space. This promotes the acquisition, spread and transmission of pathogenic microorganisms and pneumococcal disease are one of the most frequent infections among Hajj pilgrims. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of introducing the PPV23 to Malaysian Hajj pilgrims. A decision tree framework with a 1-year cycle length was adapted to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a PPV23 vaccination program with no vaccination. The cost information was retrieved from the Lembaga Tabung Haji Malaysia (LTH) database. Vaccine effectiveness was based on the locally published data and the disease incidence specifically related to Streptococcus pneumoniae was based on a literature search. Analyses were conducted from the perspective of the provider: Ministry of Health and LTH Malaysia. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER), cases averted, and net cost savings were estimated. Findings from this study showed that PPV23 vaccination for Malaysian Hajj pilgrims was cost-effective. The PPV23 vaccination programme has an ICER of MYR -449.3 (US$-110.95) per case averted. Based on the national threshold value of US$6,200-US$8,900 per capita, the base-case result shows that introduction of the PPV23 vaccine for Malaysian Hajj pilgrims is very cost-effective. Sensitivity analysis revealed parameters related to annual incidence and hospitalised cost of septicemia and disease without vaccination as the key drivers of the model outputs. Compared with no vaccination, the inclusion of PPV23 vaccination for Malaysian Hajj pilgrims was projected to result in a net cost saving of MYR59.6 million and 109,996 cases averted over 5 years period. The PPV23 vaccination program could substantially offer additional benefits in reducing the pneumococcal disease burden and healthcare cost. This could be of help for policymakers to consider the implementation of PPV23 vaccination for Malaysian performing hajj.

Estimating total spending by source of funding on routine and supplementary immunisation activities in low-income and middle-income countries, 2000-17: a financial modelling study.

BACKGROUND: Childhood immunisation is one of the most cost-effective health interventions. However, despite its known value, global access to vaccines remains far from complete. Although supply-side constraints lead to inadequate vaccine coverage in many health systems, there is no comprehensive analysis of the funding for immunisation. We aimed to fill this gap by generating estimates of funding for immunisation disaggregated by the source of funding and the type of activities in order to highlight the funding landscape for immunisation and inform policy making. METHODS: For this financial modelling study, we estimated annual spending on immunisations for 135 low-income and middle-income countries (as determined by the World Bank) from 2000 to 2017, with a focus on government, donor, and out-of-pocket spending, and disaggregated spending for vaccines and delivery costs, and routine schedules and supplementary campaigns. To generate these estimates, we extracted data from National Health Accounts, the WHO-UNICEF Joint Reporting Forms, comprehensive multi-year plans, databases from Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, and the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation's 2019 development assistance for health database. We estimated total spending on immunisation by aggregating the government, donor, prepaid private, and household spending estimates. FINDINGS: Between 2000 and 2017, funding for immunisation totalled US$112·4 billion (95% uncertainty interval 108·5-118·5). Aggregated across all low-income and middle-income countries, government spending consistently remained the largest source of funding, providing between 60·0% (57·7-61·9) and 79·3% (73·8-81·4) of total immunisation spending each year (corresponding to between $2·5 billion [2·3-2·8] and $6·4 billion [6·0-7·0] each year). Across income groups, immunisation spending per surviving infant was similar in low-income and lower-middle-income countries and territories, with average spending of $40 (38-42) in low-income countries and $42 (39-46) in lower-middle-income countries, in 2017. In low-income countries and territories, development assistance made up the largest share of total immunisation spending (69·4% [64·6-72·0]; $630·2 million) in 2017. Across the 135 countries, we observed higher vaccine coverage and increased government spending on immunisation over time, although in some countries, predominantly in Latin America and the Caribbean and in sub-Saharan Africa, vaccine coverage decreased over time, while spending increased. INTERPRETATION: These estimates highlight the progress over the past two decades in increasing spending on immunisation. However, many challenges still remain and will require dedication and commitment to ensure that the progress made in the previous decade is sustained and advanced in the next decade for the Immunization Agenda 2030. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of an intervention project engaging Traditional and Religious Leaders to improve uptake of childhood immunization in southern Nigeria.

Vaccination is a cost-effective public health intervention, yet evidence abounds that vaccination uptake is still poor in many low- and middle-income countries. Traditional and Religious Leaders play a substantial role in improving the uptake of health services such as immunization. However, there is paucity of evidence on the cost-effectiveness of using such strategies. This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of using a multi-faceted intervention that included traditional and religious leaders for community engagement to improve uptake of routine immunisation services in communities in Cross River State, Southern Nigeria. The target population for the intervention was traditional and religious leaders in randomly selected communities in Cross River State. The impact of the intervention on the uptake of routine vaccination among children 0 to 23 months was assessed using a cluster randomized trials. Outcome assessments were performed at the end of the project (36 months).The cost of the intervention was obtained from the accounting records for expenditures incurred in the course of implementing the intervention. Costs were assessed from the health provider perspective. The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that the incremental cost of the initial implementation of the intervention was US$19,357and that the incremental effect was 323 measles cases averted, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of US$60/measles case averted. However, for subsequent scale-up of the interventions to new areas not requiring a repeat expenditure of some of the initial capital expenditure the ICER was estimated to be US$34 per measles case averted. Involving the traditional and religious leaders in vaccination is a cost-effective strategy for improving the uptake of childhood routine vaccinations.

Targeted FMD Vaccines for Eastern Africa: The AgResults Foot and Mouth Disease Vaccine Challenge Project

As one of the most infectious livestock diseases in the world, foot and mouth disease (FMD) presents a constant global threat to animal trade and national economies. FMD remains a severe constraint on development and poverty reduction throughout the developing world due to many reasons, including the cost of control measures, closure of access to valuable global FMD-free markets for livestock products, production losses through reduced milk yield, reduced live weight gain, and the inability of infected livestock to perform traction. FMD virus infects a variety of cloven-hoofed animals, including cattle, sheep, goats, swine, all wild ruminants, and suidae, with high morbidity in adult animals. High mortality can occur in young animals due to myocarditis. FMD is endemic in Africa, most of Asia, the Middle East, and parts of South America. The global clustering of FMD viruses has been divided into seven virus pools, where multiple serotypes occur but within which are topotypes that remain mostly confined to that pool. Three pools cover Europe, the Middle East, and Asia; three pools cover Africa; and one pool covers the Americas. The highly infectious nature of FMDV, the existence of numerous continually circulating serotypes and associated topotypes, the potential for wildlife reservoirs, and the frequent emergence of new strains that are poorly matched to existing vaccines all serve to compound the difficulties faced by the governments of endemic countries to effectively control and reduce the burden of the disease at the national and regional levels. This clustering of viruses suggests that if vaccination is to be a major tool for control, each pool could benefit from the use of tailored or more specific vaccines relevant to the topotypes present in that pool, rather than a continued reliance on the currently more widely available vaccines. It should also be noted that, currently, there are varying degrees of effort to identify improved vaccines in different regions. There are relatively few targeted for use in Africa, while the developed world's vaccine banks have a good stock of vaccines destined for emergency outbreak use in FMDV-free countries. The AgResults Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) Vaccine Challenge Project (the "Project") is an eight-year, US $17.68 million prize competition that supports the development and uptake of high-quality quadrivalent FMD vaccines tailored to meet the needs of Eastern Africa (EA). The Project targets the following Pool Four countries: Burundi, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda. The Project is being run in two phases: a development phase, which will encourage the production of regionally relevant vaccines, and a cost-share phase, designed to help to reduce the price of these vaccines in the marketplace to the end users, which is hoped will encourage broader uptake. Manufacturers can submit quadrivalent FMD vaccines containing serotypes A, O, SAT1, and SAT2, which will be assessed as relevant for use in the region through a unique component of the Project requiring the screening of vaccines against the Eastern Africa Foot and Mouth Disease Virus Reference Antigen Panel assembled by the World Reference Laboratory for FMD (WRLFMD), at the Pirbright Institute, UK, in collaboration with the OIE/FAO FMD Reference Laboratory Network. To be eligible for the Project, sera from vaccinated cattle will be used to evaluate serological responses of FMD vaccines for their suitability for use in Eastern African countries. If they pass a determined cut-off threshold, they will be confirmed as relevant for use in the region and will be entered into the Project's cost-share phase.

Cost-Minimization and Budget Impact Analysis of a Hexavalent Vaccine (Hexaxim®) in the Colombian Expanded Program on Immunization.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate cost implications of a hexavalent vaccine (diphtheria, tetanus, and acellular pertussis [DTaP]-inactivated polio vaccine [IPV]-hepatitis B [HB]-Haemophilus influenzae type B [Hib] polysaccharide conjugated to T protein [PRP∼T]) as an alternative to DT-whole-cell pertussis (wP)-HB//Hib, DTwP, IPV, and oral polio vaccines in the Expanded Program on Immunization schedule in Colombia. METHODS: Primary vaccination (DTaP-IPV-HB-PRP∼T or DTwP-HB-Hib + IPV [2, 4, 6 months]) and booster (DTaP-IPV-HB-PRP∼T or DTwP + oral polio vaccine [18 months]) (scenario 1) and primary vaccination only (DTaP-IPV-HB-PRP∼T or DTwP-HB-Hib + IPV) (scenario 2) were evaluated. An estimated cost-minimization analysis was based on a micro costing technique for vaccination-associated activities. Adverse event (AE)-associated costs, out-of-pocket costs, and productivity losses for caregivers were included. A budget impact (12-month temporal horizon) was estimated according to the distribution of full-term and premature infants. A 5% annual discount rate was used. A 2-way univariate (tornado) analysis evaluated which variables had the greatest impact on the overall cost. RESULTS: DTaP-IPV-HB-PRP∼T resulted in a cost increase of 29.38% (scenario 1) and 22.19% (scenario 2) for full-term infants and a decrease of 0.99% (scenario 1) and 18.88% (scenario 2) for premature infants, probably because of the higher incidence of wP-related AEs and associated costs in premature infants. With a 100% replacement rate, the budget impact for full-term infants and full-term plus premature infants was 23.73% and 21.80% (scenario 1), respectively, and 13.02% and 11.14% (scenario 2), respectively, of the national immunization program budget. The variables with most impact were the hexavalent vaccine price and costs associated with the pentavalent safety profile. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporation of the hexavalent vaccine in the Expanded Program on Immunization schedule would lead to an increase in spending largely mitigated by reduced AE incidence and reduced logistic and social costs.

The CAPACITI Decision-Support Tool for National Immunization Programs.

OBJECTIVES: Immunization programs in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) are faced with an ever-growing number of vaccines of public health importance recommended by the World Health Organization, while also financing a greater proportion of the program through domestic resources. More than ever, national immunization programs must be equipped to contextualize global guidance and make choices that are best suited to their setting. The CAPACITI decision-support tool has been developed in collaboration with national immunization program decision makers in LMICs to structure and document an evidence-based, context-specific process for prioritizing or selecting among multiple vaccination products, services, or strategies. METHODS: The CAPACITI decision-support tool is based on multi-criteria decision analysis, as a structured way to incorporate multiple sources of evidence and stakeholder perspectives. The tool has been developed iteratively in consultation with 12 countries across Africa, Asia, and the Americas. RESULTS: The tool is flexible to existing country processes and can follow any type of multi-criteria decision analysis or a hybrid approach. It is structured into 5 sections: decision question, criteria for decision making, evidence assessment, appraisal, and recommendation. The Excel-based tool guides the user through the steps and document discussions in a transparent manner, with an emphasis on stakeholder engagement and country ownership. CONCLUSIONS: Pilot countries valued the CAPACITI decision-support tool as a means to consider multiple criteria and stakeholder perspectives and to evaluate trade-offs and the impact of data quality. With use, it is expected that LMICs will tailor steps to their context and streamline the tool for decision making.

Avoiding Trouble Ahead: Lessons Learned and Suggestions for Economic Evaluations of COVID-19 Vaccines.

With vaccines for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) being introduced in countries across the world, policy makers are facing many practical considerations about how best to implement a vaccination programme. The supply of vaccines is insufficient for the global population, so decisions must be made as to which groups are prioritised for any vaccination and when. Furthermore, the aims of vaccination programmes will differ between countries, with some prioritising economic benefits that could stem from the relaxation of non-pharmaceutical interventions and others seeking simply to reduce the number of COVID-19 cases or deaths. This paper aims to share the experiences and lessons learned from conducting economic evaluations in Singapore and Thailand on hypothetical COVID-19 vaccines to provide a basis for other countries to develop their own contextualised economic evaluations, with particular focus on the key uncertainties, technical challenges, and characteristics that modellers should consider in partnership with key stakeholders. Which vaccines, vaccination strategies, and policy responses are most economically beneficial remains uncertain. It is therefore important for all governments to conduct their own analyses to inform local policy responses to COVID-19, including the implementation of COVID-19 vaccines in both the short and the long run. It is essential that such studies are designed, and ideally conducted, before vaccines are introduced so that policy decisions and implementation procedures are not delayed.

Cost-effectiveness of varicella and herpes zoster vaccination in Sweden: An economic evaluation using a dynamic transmission model.

OBJECTIVES: Comprehensive cost-effectiveness analyses of introducing varicella and/or herpes zoster vaccination in the Swedish national vaccination programme. DESIGN: Cost-effectiveness analyses based on epidemiological results from a specifically developed transmission model. SETTING: National vaccination programme in Sweden, over an 85- or 20-year time horizon depending on the vaccination strategy. PARTICIPANTS: Hypothetical cohorts of people aged 12 months and 65-years at baseline. INTERVENTIONS: Four alternative vaccination strategies; 1, not to vaccinate; 2, varicella vaccination with one dose of the live attenuated vaccine at age 12 months and a second dose at age 18 months; 3, herpes zoster vaccination with one dose of the live attenuated vaccine at 65 years of age; and 4, both vaccine against varicella and herpes zoster with the before-mentioned strategies. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Accumulated cost and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) for each strategy, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). RESULTS: It would be cost-effective to vaccinate against varicella (dominant), but not to vaccinate against herpes zoster (ICER of EUR 200,000), assuming a cost-effectiveness threshold of EUR 50,000 per QALY. The incremental analysis between varicella vaccination only and the combined programme results in a cost per gained QALY of almost EUR 1.6 million. CONCLUSIONS: The results from this study are central components for policy-relevant decision-making, and suggest that it was cost-effective to introduce varicella vaccination in Sweden, whereas herpes zoster vaccination with the live attenuated vaccine for the elderly was not cost-effective-the health effects of the latter vaccination cannot be considered reasonable in relation to its costs. Future observational and surveillance studies are needed to make reasonable predictions on how boosting affects the herpes zoster incidence in the population, and thus the cost-effectiveness of a vaccination programme against varicella. Also, the link between herpes zoster and sequelae need to be studied in more detail to include it suitably in health economic evaluations.

How Should the World Pay for a Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Vaccine?

The potential health and economic value of a vaccine for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is self-evident given nearly 2 million deaths, "collateral" loss of life as other conditions go untreated, and massive economic damage. Results from the first licensed products are very encouraging; however, there are important reasons why we will likely need second and third generation vaccines. Dedicated incentives and funding focused explicitly on nurturing and advancing competing second and third generation vaccines are essential. This article proposes a collaborative, market-based financing mechanism for the world to incentivize and pay for the development of, and provide equitable access to, second and third generation COVID-19 vaccines. Specifically, we propose consideration of a Benefit-Based Advance Market Commitment (BBAMC). The BBAMC uses health technology assessment to determine value-based prices to guarantee overall market revenues, not revenue for any specific product or company. The poorest countries would not pay a value-based price but a discounted "tail-price." Innovators must agree to supply them at this tail price or to facilitate technology transfer to local licensees at low or zero cost to enable them to supply at this price. We expect these purchases to be paid for in full or large part by global donors. The BBAMC therefore sets prices in relation to value, protects intellectual property rights, encourages competition, and ensures all populations get access to vaccines, subject to agreed priority allocation rules.

Economic evaluation of rotavirus vaccination: an important step of the introduction to the national immunization program in Thailand.

INTRODUCTION: World Health Organization recommends rotavirus vaccine for all national immunization programs (NIPs). To provide country-specific evidence, we conducted economic evaluation of a monovalent rotavirus vaccination using specific data of the pilot phase in Thailand. METHOD: A Markov model was adopted to compare the 2020 birth cohort once receiving rotavirus vaccination versus no vaccination from healthcare and societal perspective over five years. Data on disease burden, vaccine effectiveness, costs, and utilities were taken from a cohort study in two provinces of Thailand.  Sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the results. RESULTS: Rotavirus vaccination would reduce rotavirus diarrhea and costs of illness by 48% and 71%, respectively, over the first five years of life. At USD 13 per dose, vaccine was cost-effective with the ICERs of USD 4,114 and USD 1,571per QALY gained from healthcare and societal perspective, respectively. Results were sensitive to incidence and vaccine cost.  The budget for vaccine purchasing was estimated at USD13 million per year. CONCLUSION: Incorporating rotavirus vaccination into the NIP substantially reduced health and cost outcomes and was cost-effective for both perspectives. However, the government needs to negotiate vaccine price prior to program implementation to achieve favorable budget impact.