Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (6)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Skull, S.
Right arrow Articles by Carnie, J
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Skull, S.
Right arrow Articles by Carnie, J
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

International Journal of Epidemiology 2001;30:571-578
© International Epidemiological Association 2001


Infectious Disease

Should programmes for community-level meningococcal vaccination be considered in Australia? An economic evaluation

SA Skulla,b, JRG Butlerc, P Robinsonb and J Carnieb

a Victorian Infectious Diseases Service, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, 3050 Australia.
b Communicable Diseases Section, Public Health Division, Department of Human Services Victoria, Australia.
c National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.

Dr Susan Skull, Epidemiology Division, Victorian Infectious Diseases Service, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Victoria 3050, Australia. E-mail: sue.skull{at}mh.org.au

Abstract

Background Disease due to serogroup C Neisseria meningitidis is life-threatening and potentially preventable by vaccination. In 1999, the UK instigated mass vaccination after a sustained increase in serogroup C meningococcal disease. In the same year, Victoria, Australia experienced a similar change in disease epidemiology. It is timely to undertake an economic evaluation of options for community vaccination in Australia based on local data.

Methods Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses of three options for use of polysaccharide vaccine were undertaken for a hypothetical population aged 15–19 years. Baseline analyses assumed 5 years' duration of vaccine protection following a single year of programme implementation. Sensitivity analyses of key variables were performed, including vaccine coverage and effectiveness, case fatality rate and the discount rate. Outcomes included the number of people vaccinated, cases averted, life-years saved and disability-adjusted life-years (DALY) averted. Cost-benefit analysis used lost earnings avoided as a measure of vaccination benefit.

Results Vaccination of people aged 15–19 years in a defined population with a high rate of disease was the most cost-effective option. Compared with no vaccination and assuming 5 years' duration of protection and exclusion of direct cost savings, this resulted in a discounted cost per life-year saved of $23 623, a cost per DALY avoided of $21 097 and benefits exceeding costs in discounted terms. The ‘break-even’ incidence rate for this option with exclusion of direct cost savings was 14.0/100 000.

Conclusions Community use of polysaccharide vaccination may be cost effective in Australia under certain conditions. Economic evidence favours use of vaccination in well-defined populations with a high rate of disease. Policy decision-making also requires consideration of non-economic factors, including feasibility of implementation and risk perception by the community.

KEY MESSAGES

  • In examining options for use of meningococcal vaccine among 15–19-year-olds, vaccination within a defined population with a high rate of disease was the most cost effective.
  • The ‘break-even’ incidence rate for this option with exclusion of direct cost savings was 14/100 000.
  • Cost-effectiveness ratios were most sensitive to changes in incidence rate, case fatality rate, duration of vaccine effectiveness and the discount rate.

Keywords Neisseria meningitidis, cost-effectiveness analysis, immunization programmes, health planning

Accepted 22 December 2000


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.