IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aphecp/v19y2021i5d10.1007_s40258-021-00667-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using Constrained Optimization for the Allocation of COVID-19 Vaccines in the Philippines

Author

Listed:
  • Christian Alvin H. Buhat

    (University of the Philippines Los Baños
    University of the Philippines Los Baños)

  • Destiny S. M. Lutero

    (University of the Philippines Los Baños
    University of the Philippines Los Baños)

  • Yancee H. Olave

    (University of the Philippines Los Baños
    University of the Philippines Los Baños)

  • Kemuel M. Quindala

    (University of the Philippines Los Baños
    University of the Philippines Los Baños)

  • Mary Grace P. Recreo

    (University of the Philippines Los Baños
    University of the Philippines Los Baños)

  • Dylan Antonio S. J. Talabis

    (University of the Philippines Los Baños
    University of the Philippines Los Baños)

  • Monica C. Torres

    (University of the Philippines Los Baños
    University of the Philippines Los Baños)

  • Jerrold M. Tubay

    (University of the Philippines Los Baños
    University of the Philippines Los Baños)

  • Jomar F. Rabajante

    (University of the Philippines Los Baños
    University of the Philippines Los Baños)

Abstract

Background Vaccine allocation is a national concern especially for countries such as the Philippines that have limited resources in acquiring COVID-19 vaccines. As such, certain groups are suggested to be prioritized for vaccination to protect the most vulnerable before vaccinating others. Objective The study aims to determine an optimal and equitable allocation of COVID-19 vaccines in the Philippines that will minimize the projected number of additional COVID-19 deaths while satisfying the priority groups for immediate vaccination. Methods In this study, a linear programming model is formulated to determine an allocation of vaccines such that COVID-19 deaths are minimized while the prioritization framework set by the government is satisfied. Data used were collected up to November 2020. Total vaccine supply, vaccine effectiveness, vaccine cost, and projected deaths are analyzed. Results of the model are also compared to other allocation approaches. Results Results of the model show that a vaccine coverage of around 60–70% of the population can be enough for a community with limited supplies, and an increase in vaccine supply is beneficial if the initial coverage is less than the specified target range. Additionally, among the vaccines considered in the study, the one with 89.9% effectiveness and a 183 Philippine peso price per dose projected the lowest number of deaths. Compared with other model variations and common allocation approaches, the model has achieved both an optimal and equitable allocation. Conclusions Having a 100% coverage for vaccination with a 100% effectiveness rate of vaccine is ideal for all countries. However, some countries have limited resources. Therefore, the results of our study can be used by policymakers to determine an optimal and equitable distribution of COVID-19 vaccines for a country/community.

Suggested Citation

  • Christian Alvin H. Buhat & Destiny S. M. Lutero & Yancee H. Olave & Kemuel M. Quindala & Mary Grace P. Recreo & Dylan Antonio S. J. Talabis & Monica C. Torres & Jerrold M. Tubay & Jomar F. Rabajante, 2021. "Using Constrained Optimization for the Allocation of COVID-19 Vaccines in the Philippines," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 19(5), pages 699-708, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:19:y:2021:i:5:d:10.1007_s40258-021-00667-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s40258-021-00667-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40258-021-00667-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40258-021-00667-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Adam, 2020. "A guide to R — the pandemic’s misunderstood metric," Nature, Nature, vol. 583(7816), pages 346-348, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Emanuele Blasioli & Bahareh Mansouri & Srinivas Subramanya Tamvada & Elkafi Hassini, 2023. "Vaccine Allocation and Distribution: A Review with a Focus on Quantitative Methodologies and Application to Equity, Hesitancy, and COVID-19 Pandemic," SN Operations Research Forum, Springer, vol. 4(2), pages 1-32, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Greenhalgh, Trisha & Engebretsen, Eivind, 2022. "The science-policy relationship in times of crisis: An urgent call for a pragmatist turn," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 306(C).
    2. Luca Scrucca, 2022. "A COVINDEX based on a GAM beta regression model with an application to the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 31(4), pages 881-900, October.
    3. Mingolla, Stefano & Lu, Zhongming, 2022. "Impact of implementation timing on the effectiveness of stay-at-home requirement under the COVID-19 pandemic: Lessons from the Italian Case," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(6), pages 504-511.
    4. Yuki Furuse & Yura K. Ko & Kota Ninomiya & Motoi Suzuki & Hitoshi Oshitani, 2021. "Relationship of Test Positivity Rates with COVID-19 Epidemic Dynamics," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(9), pages 1-10, April.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:19:y:2021:i:5:d:10.1007_s40258-021-00667-z. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.