IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v21y2003i1p13-38.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic Evaluations of Varicella Vaccination Programmes

Author

Listed:
  • Nancy Thiry
  • Philippe Beutels
  • Pierre Damme
  • Eddy Doorslaer

Abstract

Chickenpox infections are generally mild but due to their very high incidence among healthy children they give rise to considerable morbidity and occasional mortality. With the development of a varicella vaccine in the early 1970s and its progressive licensing in many countries, interest in the efficiency of varicella immunisation programmes grew. The objective of this review was to discuss the methodological aspects and results of published economic evaluations of varicella vaccination. From this, we attempted to make recommendations. A computerised search was carried out; 17 full economic evaluations of varicella vaccination were retrieved. The review identified the methodological divergences and similarities between the articles in four areas: study design, epidemiological data, economic data and model characteristics. We assessed to what extent the applied methods conform to general guidelines for the economic evaluation of healthcare interventions and compared the studies’ results. The desirability of a universal vaccination programme depends on whose perspective is taken. Despite variability in data and model assumptions, the studies suggest that universal vaccination of infants is attractive to society because large savings occur from averted unproductive days for parents. For the healthcare payer, universal vaccination of infants does not generate savings. Vaccination of susceptible adolescents has been proposed by some authors as a viable alternative; the attractiveness of this is highly dependent on the negative predictive value of anamnestic screening. Targeted vaccination of healthcare workers and immunocompromised individuals appears relatively cost effective. Findings for other target groups are either contradictory or provide insufficient evidence for any unequivocal recommendations to be made. High sensitivity to vaccine price was reported in most studies. This review highlights that some aspects of these studies need to be further improved before final recommendations can be made. First, more transparency, completeness and compliance to general methodological guidelines are required. Second, because of the increasing severity of varicella with age, it is preferable and in some cases essential to use dynamic models for the assessment of universal vaccination strategies. Third, most studies focused on the strategy of vaccinating children only while their results depended heavily on disputable assumptions (regarding vaccine effectiveness and impact on herpes zoster). Since violation of these assumptions could have important adverse public health effects, we suggest pre-adolescent vaccination as a more secure alternative. This option deserves more attention in future analyses. Copyright Adis International Limited 2003

Suggested Citation

  • Nancy Thiry & Philippe Beutels & Pierre Damme & Eddy Doorslaer, 2003. "Economic Evaluations of Varicella Vaccination Programmes," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 13-38, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:21:y:2003:i:1:p:13-38
    DOI: 10.2165/00019053-200321010-00002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2165/00019053-200321010-00002
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2165/00019053-200321010-00002?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. Emmett B. Keeler & Shan Cretin, 1983. "Discounting of Life-Saving and Other Nonmonetary Effects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 300-306, March.
    2. Werner B. F. Brouwer & Marc A. Koopmanschap & Frans F. H. Rutten, 1997. "Productivity Costs Measurement Through Quality of Life? A Response to the Recommendation of the Washington Panel," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(3), pages 253-259, May.
    3. Michael Parsonage & Henry Neuburger, 1992. "Discounting and health benefits," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 1(1), pages 71-76, April.
    4. Karen Gerard & Gavin Mooney, 1993. "Qaly league tables: Handle with care," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 2(1), pages 59-64, April.
    5. Scuffham, P. & Devlin, N. & Eberhart-Phillips, J. & Wilson-Salt, R., 1999. "The cost-effectiveness of introducing a varicella vaccine to the New Zealand immunisation schedule," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 49(6), pages 763-779, September.
    6. Koopmanschap, Marc A. & Rutten, Frans F. H. & van Ineveld, B. Martin & van Roijen, Leona, 1995. "The friction cost method for measuring indirect costs of disease," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 171-189, June.
    7. Ben A. Van Hout, 1998. "Discounting costs and effects: a reconsideration," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 7(7), pages 581-594, November.
    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. Kimberly M. Thompson & Radboud J. Duintjer Tebbens, 2006. "Retrospective Cost‐Effectiveness Analyses for Polio Vaccination in the United States," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(6), pages 1423-1440, December.
    2. M. Postma & J. Bos & R. Welte & R. Groot & W. Luytjes & H. Rümke & P. Beutels, 2004. "Do costs of varicella justify routine infant vaccination?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 5(1), pages 54-57, February.
    3. Sun-Young Kim & Sue Goldie, 2008. "Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Vaccination Programmes," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 191-215, March.
    4. Joke Bilcke & Philippe Beutels, 2009. "Reviewing the Cost Effectiveness of Rotavirus Vaccination," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 281-297, April.

    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. Brouwer, Werner B. F. & Koopmanschap, Marc A., 2000. "On the economic foundations of CEA. Ladies and gentlemen, take your positions!," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 439-459, July.
    2. Brouwer, W. B. F. & Koopmanschap, M. A. & Rutten, F. F. H., 1999. "Productivity losses without absence: measurement validation and empirical evidence," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 13-27, July.
    3. John Hutton, 2012. "‘Health Economics’ and the evolution of economic evaluation of health technologies," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(1), pages 13-18, January.
    4. Angelina Lazaro & Ramon Barberan & Encarnacion Rubio, 2002. "The economic evaluation of health programmes: why discount health consequences more than monetary consequences?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(3), pages 339-350.
    5. Tilling, C & Krol, M & Tsuchiya, A & Brazier, J & van Exel, J & Brouwer, W, 2009. "The impact of losses in income due to ill health: does the EQ-5D reflect lost earnings?," MPRA Paper 29837, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Carmen Herrero & Juan D. Moreno‐Ternero, 2009. "Estimating production costs in the economic evaluation of health‐care programs," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(1), pages 21-35, January.
    7. Brouwer, W. B. F. & van Exel, N. J. A. & Koopmanschap, M. A. & Rutten, F. F. H., 2002. "Productivity costs before and after absence from work: as important as common?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 173-187, August.
    8. Hugh Gravelle & Dave Smith, 2001. "Discounting for health effects in cost–benefit and cost‐effectiveness analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 10(7), pages 587-599, October.
    9. Werner Brouwer & Samare Huls & Ayesha Sajjad & Tim Kanters & Leona Hakkaart-van Roijen & Job Exel, 2022. "In Absence of Absenteeism: Some Thoughts on Productivity Costs in Economic Evaluations in a Post-corona Era," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 7-11, January.
    10. Thomas DeLeire & Willard Manning, 2004. "Labor market costs of illness: prevalence matters," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(3), pages 239-250, March.
    11. Cairns, John, 2006. "Developments in discounting: With special reference to future health events," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 282-297, August.
    12. Erik Nord, 2011. "Discounting future health benefits: the poverty of consistency arguments," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(1), pages 16-26, January.
    13. Arthur E. Attema & Werner B. F. Brouwer & Karl Claxton, 2018. "Discounting in Economic Evaluations," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(7), pages 745-758, July.
    14. Werner B.F. Brouwer & Frans F.H. Rutten, 2003. "The missing link: on the line between C and E," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(8), pages 629-636, August.
    15. Davies, Ruth & Roderick, Paul & Raftery, James, 2003. "The evaluation of disease prevention and treatment using simulation models," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 150(1), pages 53-66, October.
    16. John A. Nyman, 2012. "Productivity Costs Revisited: Toward A New Us Policy," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(12), pages 1387-1401, December.
    17. Brouwer, Werner B. F. & van Exel, N. Job A., 2004. "Discounting in decision making: the consistency argument revisited empirically," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 187-194, February.
    18. Jeff Richardson & Stuart Peacock & Angelo Iezzi, 2009. "Do quality-adjusted life years take account of lost income? Evidence from an Australian survey," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 10(1), pages 103-109, February.
    19. James O’Mahony & Anthony Newall & Joost Rosmalen, 2015. "Dealing with Time in Health Economic Evaluation: Methodological Issues and Recommendations for Practice," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(12), pages 1255-1268, December.
    20. David K. Whynes & Aileen R. Neilson & Andrew R. Walker & Jack D. Hardcastle, 1998. "Faecal occult blood screening for colorectal cancer: is it cost‐effective?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 7(1), pages 21-29, February.

    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:pharme:v:21:y:2003:i:1:p:13-38. 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.