RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The phased withdrawal of oral polio vaccine (OPV) and the introduction of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV) is central to the polio 'end-game' strategy. METHODS: We analyzed the cost implications in Chile of a switch from the vaccination scheme consisting of a pentavalent vaccine with whole-cell pertussis component (wP) plus IPV/OPV vaccines to a scheme with a hexavalent vaccine with acellular pertussis component (aP) and IPV (Hexaxim®) from a societal perspective. Cost data were collected from a variety of sources including national estimates and previous vaccine studies. All costs were expressed in 2017 prices (US$ 1.00 = $Ch 666.26). RESULTS: The overall costs associated with the vaccination scheme (4 doses of pentavalent vaccine plus 1 dose IPV and 3 doses OPV) from a societal perspective was estimated to be US$ 12.70 million, of which US$ 8.84 million were associated with the management of adverse events related to wP. In comparison, the cost associated with the 4-dose scheme with a hexavalent vaccine (based upon the PAHO reference price) was US$ 19.76 million. The cost of switching to the hexavalent vaccine would be an additional US$ 6.45 million. Overall, depending on the scenario, the costs of switching to the hexavalent scheme would range from an additional US$ 2.62 million to US$ 6.45 million compared with the current vaccination scheme. CONCLUSIONS: The switch to the hexavalent vaccine schedule in Chile would lead to additional acquisition costs, which would be partially offset by improved logistics, and a reduction in adverse events associated with the current vaccines.
Asunto(s)
Vacuna contra Difteria, Tétanos y Tos Ferina/administración & dosificación , Vacuna contra Difteria, Tétanos y Tos Ferina/economía , Sustitución de Medicamentos/economía , Vacunas contra Haemophilus/administración & dosificación , Vacunas contra Haemophilus/economía , Vacunas contra Hepatitis B/administración & dosificación , Vacunas contra Hepatitis B/economía , Poliomielitis/prevención & control , Vacuna Antipolio de Virus Inactivados/administración & dosificación , Vacuna Antipolio de Virus Inactivados/economía , Vacuna Antipolio Oral/administración & dosificación , Vacuna Antipolio Oral/economía , Vacunación/economía , Chile , Costos y Análisis de Costo , Humanos , Esquemas de Inmunización , Lactante , Vacunas Combinadas/administración & dosificación , Vacunas Combinadas/economíaRESUMEN
Most influenza vaccines in Mexico are trivalent, containing two influenza A strains and a single B strain. Quadrivalent influenza vaccines (QIVs) extend protection by including an additional B strain to cover both co-circulating B lineages. Here, we retrospectively estimated how a switch to QIV in Mexico would have impacted influenza-related health outcomes over the 2010/2011 to 2015/2016 influenza seasons, and prospectively estimated the budget impact of using QIV in Mexico's national immunization program from 2016/2017 to 2020/2021. For the retrospective estimation, we used an age-stratified static model incorporating Mexico-specific input parameters. For the prospective estimation, we used a budget impact model based on retrospective attack rates considering predicted future vaccination coverage. Between 2010/2011 and 2015/2016, a switch to QIV would have prevented 270,596 additional influenza cases, 102,000 general practitioner consultations, 140,062 days of absenteeism, 3,323 hospitalizations, and 312 deaths, saving Mex$214 million (US$10.8 million) in third-party payer costs. In the prospective analysis, a switch to QIV was estimated to prevent an additional 225,497 influenza cases, 85,000 general practitioner consultations, 116,718 days of absenteeism, 2,769 hospitalizations, and 260 deaths, saving Mex$178 million (US$9 million) in third-party payer costs over 5 years. Compared to the trivalent vaccine, the benefit and costs saved with QIV were sensitive to the distribution of influenza A vs. B cases and trivalent vaccine effectiveness against the mismatched B strain. These results suggest switching to QIV in Mexico would benefit healthcare providers and society by preventing influenza cases, morbidity, and deaths, and reducing associated use of medical resources.