Cost-Effectiveness of the Second COVID-19 Booster Vaccination in the USA.

IF 3.1 4区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS Applied Health Economics and Health Policy Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-01 DOI:10.1007/s40258-023-00844-2
Rui Li, Pengyi Lu, Christopher K Fairley, José A Pagán, Wenyi Hu, Qianqian Yang, Guihua Zhuang, Mingwang Shen, Yan Li, Lei Zhang
{"title":"Cost-Effectiveness of the Second COVID-19 Booster Vaccination in the USA.","authors":"Rui Li, Pengyi Lu, Christopher K Fairley, José A Pagán, Wenyi Hu, Qianqian Yang, Guihua Zhuang, Mingwang Shen, Yan Li, Lei Zhang","doi":"10.1007/s40258-023-00844-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the cost effectiveness of the second COVID-19 booster vaccination with different age groups.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed a decision-analytic Susceptible-Exposed-Infected-Recovered (SEIR)-Markov model by five age groups (0-4 years, 5-11 years 12-17 years, 18-49 years, and 50+ years) and calibrated the model by actual mortality in each age group in the USA. We conducted five scenarios to evaluate the cost effectiveness of the second booster strategy and incremental benefits if the strategy would expand to 18-49 years and 12-17 years, from a health care system perspective. The analysis was reported according to the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 statement.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Implementing the second booster strategy for those aged ≥ 50 years cost $823 million but reduced direct medical costs by $1166 million, corresponding to a benefit-cost ratio of 1.42. Moreover, the strategy also resulted in a gain of 2596 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) during the 180-day evaluation period, indicating it was dominant. Further, vaccinating individuals aged 18-49 years with the second booster would result in an additional gain of $1592 million and 8790 QALYs. Similarly, expanding the vaccination to individuals aged 12-17 years would result in an additional gain of $16 million and 403 QALYs. However, if social interaction between all age groups was severed, vaccination expansion to ages 18-49 and 12-17 years would no longer be dominant but cost effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $37,572 and $26,705/QALY gained, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The second booster strategy was likely to be dominant in reducing the disease burden of the COVID-19 pandemic. Expanding the second booster strategy to ages 18-49 and 12-17 years would remain dominant due to their social contacts with the older age group.</p>","PeriodicalId":8065,"journal":{"name":"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-023-00844-2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To assess the cost effectiveness of the second COVID-19 booster vaccination with different age groups.

Methods: We developed a decision-analytic Susceptible-Exposed-Infected-Recovered (SEIR)-Markov model by five age groups (0-4 years, 5-11 years 12-17 years, 18-49 years, and 50+ years) and calibrated the model by actual mortality in each age group in the USA. We conducted five scenarios to evaluate the cost effectiveness of the second booster strategy and incremental benefits if the strategy would expand to 18-49 years and 12-17 years, from a health care system perspective. The analysis was reported according to the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards 2022 statement.

Results: Implementing the second booster strategy for those aged ≥ 50 years cost $823 million but reduced direct medical costs by $1166 million, corresponding to a benefit-cost ratio of 1.42. Moreover, the strategy also resulted in a gain of 2596 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) during the 180-day evaluation period, indicating it was dominant. Further, vaccinating individuals aged 18-49 years with the second booster would result in an additional gain of $1592 million and 8790 QALYs. Similarly, expanding the vaccination to individuals aged 12-17 years would result in an additional gain of $16 million and 403 QALYs. However, if social interaction between all age groups was severed, vaccination expansion to ages 18-49 and 12-17 years would no longer be dominant but cost effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $37,572 and $26,705/QALY gained, respectively.

Conclusion: The second booster strategy was likely to be dominant in reducing the disease burden of the COVID-19 pandemic. Expanding the second booster strategy to ages 18-49 and 12-17 years would remain dominant due to their social contacts with the older age group.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国第二次新冠肺炎加强疫苗接种的成本效益。
目的:评估不同年龄组第二次新冠肺炎加强针接种的成本效益。方法:我们按五个年龄组(0-4岁、5-11岁、12-17岁、18-49岁和50岁以上)开发了一个决策分析易感暴露感染康复(SEIR)-马尔可夫模型,并根据美国每个年龄组的实际死亡率校准了该模型。从医疗保健系统的角度来看,我们进行了五种方案来评估第二种加强策略的成本效益和如果该策略扩展到18-49岁和12-17岁的增量效益。该分析是根据《2022年综合健康经济评估报告标准》声明进行报告的。结果:为≥50岁的人群实施第二种加强策略花费了8.23亿美元,但减少了11.66亿美元的直接医疗成本,相应的效益成本比为1.42。此外,在180天的评估期内,该策略还增加了2596个质量调整生命年(QALYs),表明其占主导地位。此外,为18-49岁的个人接种第二针加强针将带来15.92亿美元和8790个QALYs的额外收益。同样,将疫苗接种范围扩大到12-17岁的个人将带来1600万美元的额外收益和403个QALYs。然而,如果切断所有年龄组之间的社会互动,将疫苗接种扩展到18-49岁和12-17岁将不再占主导地位,而是具有成本效益,增加的成本效益比(ICER)分别为37572美元和26705美元/QALY。结论:第二种加强策略可能在减少新冠肺炎大流行的疾病负担方面占主导地位。将第二种加强策略扩大到18-49岁和12-17岁,由于他们与老年群体的社会联系,将继续占主导地位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics and Econometrics
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
2.80%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: Applied Health Economics and Health Policy provides timely publication of cutting-edge research and expert opinion from this increasingly important field, making it a vital resource for payers, providers and researchers alike. The journal includes high quality economic research and reviews of all aspects of healthcare from various perspectives and countries, designed to communicate the latest applied information in health economics and health policy. While emphasis is placed on information with practical applications, a strong basis of underlying scientific rigor is maintained.
期刊最新文献
Social Costs of Smoking in the Czech Republic. Economic Evaluations of Robotic-Assisted Surgery: Methods, Challenges and Opportunities. Onasemnogene Abeparvovec Gene Therapy and Risdiplam for the Treatment of Spinal Muscular Atrophy in Thailand: A Cost-Utility Analysis. The Impact of the Approach to Accounting for Age and Sex in Economic Models on Predicted Quality-Adjusted Life-Years. Measuring the Impact of Medical Cannabis Law Adoption on Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance Costs: A Difference-in-Difference Analysis, 2003–2022
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1