Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Economic Evaluation of Vaccination Programs: A Guide for Selecting Modeling Approaches.
Mauskopf, Josephine; Blake, Leslie; Eiden, Amanda; Roberts, Craig; Hu, Tianyan; Nyaku, Mawuli.
Affiliation
  • Mauskopf J; Department of Health Economics, RTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
  • Blake L; Department of Health Economics, RTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA.
  • Eiden A; Center for Observation and Real-World Evidence, Merck & Co, Inc, Kenilworth, NJ, USA.
  • Roberts C; Center for Observation and Real-World Evidence, Merck & Co, Inc, Kenilworth, NJ, USA.
  • Hu T; Center for Observation and Real-World Evidence, Merck & Co, Inc, Kenilworth, NJ, USA.
  • Nyaku M; Center for Observation and Real-World Evidence, Merck & Co, Inc, Kenilworth, NJ, USA. Electronic address: mawuli.nyaku@merck.com.
Value Health ; 25(5): 810-823, 2022 05.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35221205
OBJECTIVES: Illustrate 3 economic evaluation methods whose value measures may be useful to decision makers considering vaccination programs. METHODS: Keyword searches identified example publications of cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), fiscal health modeling (FHM), and constrained optimization (CO) for economic evaluation of a vaccination program in countries where at least 2 of the methods had been used. We examined the extent to which different value measures may be useful for decision makers considering adoption of a new vaccination program. With these findings, we created a guide for selecting modeling approaches illustrating the decision-maker contexts and policy objectives for which each method may be useful. RESULTS: We identified 8 countries with published evaluations for vaccination programs using >1 method for 4 infections: influenza, human papilloma virus, rotavirus, and malaria. CEA studies targeted health system decision makers using a threshold to determine the efficiency of a new vaccination program. FHM studies targeted public sector spending decision makers estimating lifetime changes in government tax revenue net of transfer payments. CO studies targeted decision makers selecting from a mix of options for preventing an infectious disease within budget and feasibility constraints. Cost and utility inputs, epidemiologic models, comparators, and constraints varied by modeling method. CONCLUSIONS: Although CEAs measures of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are critical for understanding vaccination program efficiency for all decision makers determining access and reimbursement, FHMs provide measures of the program's impact on public spending for government officials, and COs provide measures of the optimal mix of all prevention interventions for public health officials.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Vaccination / Immunization Programs Type of study: Evaluation_studies / Health_economic_evaluation / Prognostic_studies Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Value Health Journal subject: FARMACOLOGIA Year: 2022 Document type: Article Affiliation country: United States Country of publication: United States

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Vaccination / Immunization Programs Type of study: Evaluation_studies / Health_economic_evaluation / Prognostic_studies Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Value Health Journal subject: FARMACOLOGIA Year: 2022 Document type: Article Affiliation country: United States Country of publication: United States