Displaying all 3 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Loganathan T, Jit M, Hutubessy R, Ng CW, Lee WS, Verguet S
    Trop Med Int Health, 2016 Nov;21(11):1458-1467.
    PMID: 27503549 DOI: 10.1111/tmi.12766
    OBJECTIVES: To evaluate rotavirus vaccination in Malaysia from the household's perspective. The extended cost-effectiveness analysis (ECEA) framework quantifies the broader value of universal vaccination starting with non-health benefits such as financial risk protection and equity. These dimensions better enable decision-makers to evaluate policy on the public finance of health programmes.

    METHODS: The incidence, health service utilisation and household expenditure related to rotavirus gastroenteritis according to national income quintiles were obtained from local data sources. Multiple birth cohorts were distributed into income quintiles and followed from birth over the first five years of life in a multicohort, static model.

    RESULTS: We found that the rich pay more out of pocket (OOP) than the poor, as the rich use more expensive private care. OOP payments among the poorest although small are high as a proportion of household income. Rotavirus vaccination results in substantial reduction in rotavirus episodes and expenditure and provides financial risk protection to all income groups. Poverty reduction benefits are concentrated amongst the poorest two income quintiles.

    CONCLUSION: We propose that universal vaccination complements health financing reforms in strengthening Universal Health Coverage (UHC). ECEA provides an important tool to understand the implications of vaccination for UHC, beyond traditional considerations of economic efficiency.

    Matched MeSH terms: Rotavirus Vaccines/economics*
  2. Kotirum S, Vutipongsatorn N, Kongpakwattana K, Hutubessy R, Chaiyakunapruk N
    Vaccine, 2017 06 08;35(26):3364-3386.
    PMID: 28504193 DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2017.04.051
    INTRODUCTION: World Health Organization (WHO) recommends Rotavirus vaccines to prevent and control rotavirus infections. Economic evaluations (EE) have been considered to support decision making of national policy. Summarizing global experience of the economic value of rotavirus vaccines is crucial in order to encourage global WHO recommendations for vaccine uptake. Therefore, a systematic review of economic evaluations of rotavirus vaccine was conducted.

    METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, NHS EED, EconLit, CEA Registry, SciELO, LILACS, CABI-Global Health Database, Popline, World Bank - e-Library, and WHOLIS. Full economic evaluations studies, published from inception to November 2015, evaluating Rotavirus vaccines preventing Rotavirus infections were included. The methods, assumptions, results and conclusions of the included studies were extracted and appraised using WHO guide for standardization of EE of immunization programs.

    RESULTS: 104 relevant studies were included. The majority of studies were conducted in high-income countries. Cost-utility analysis was mostly reported in many studies using incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per DALY averted or QALY gained. Incremental cost per QALY gained was used in many studies from high-income countries. Mass routine vaccination against rotavirus provided the ICERs ranging from cost-saving to highly cost-effective in comparison to no vaccination among low-income countries. Among middle-income countries, vaccination offered the ICERs ranging from cost-saving to cost-effective. Due to low- or no subsidized price of rotavirus vaccines from external funders, being not cost-effective was reported in some high-income settings.

    CONCLUSION: Mass vaccination against rotavirus was generally found to be cost-effective, particularly in low- and middle-income settings according to the external subsidization of vaccine price. On the other hand, it may not be a cost-effective intervention at market price in some high-income settings. This systematic review provides supporting information to health policy-makers and health professionals when considering rotavirus vaccination as a national program.

    Matched MeSH terms: Rotavirus Vaccines/economics
  3. Loganathan T, Ng CW, Lee WS, Hutubessy RCW, Verguet S, Jit M
    Health Policy Plan, 2018 Mar 01;33(2):204-214.
    PMID: 29228339 DOI: 10.1093/heapol/czx166
    Cost-effectiveness thresholds (CETs) based on the Commission on Macroeconomics and Health (CMH) are extensively used in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) lacking locally defined CETs. These thresholds were originally intended for global and regional prioritization, and do not reflect local context or affordability at the national level, so their value for informing resource allocation decisions has been questioned. Using these thresholds, rotavirus vaccines are widely regarded as cost-effective interventions in LMICs. However, high vaccine prices remain a barrier towards vaccine introduction. This study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness, affordability and threshold price of universal rotavirus vaccination at various CETs in Malaysia. Cost-effectiveness of Rotarix and RotaTeq were evaluated using a multi-cohort model. Pan American Health Organization Revolving Fund's vaccine prices were used as tender price, while the recommended retail price for Malaysia was used as market price. We estimate threshold prices defined as prices at which vaccination becomes cost-effective, at various CETs reflecting economic theories of human capital, societal willingness-to-pay and marginal productivity. A budget impact analysis compared programmatic costs with the healthcare budget. At tender prices, both vaccines were cost-saving. At market prices, cost-effectiveness differed with thresholds used. At market price, using 'CMH thresholds', Rotarix programmes were cost-effective and RotaTeq were not cost-effective from the healthcare provider's perspective, while both vaccines were cost-effective from the societal perspective. Using other CETs, both vaccines were not cost-effective at market price, from the healthcare provider's and societal perspectives. At tender and cost-effective prices, rotavirus vaccination cost ∼1 and 3% of the public health budget, respectively. Using locally defined thresholds, rotavirus vaccination is cost-effective at vaccine prices in line with international tenders, but not at market prices. Thresholds representing marginal productivity are likely to be lower than those reflecting human capital and individual preference measures, and may be useful in determining affordable vaccine prices.
    Matched MeSH terms: Rotavirus Vaccines/economics*
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links