含麻疹成分疫苗 (MCV) 第二剂的经济评估:对现有证据的系统回顾。

IF 5.5 3区 医学 Q1 IMMUNOLOGY Expert Review of Vaccines Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-26 DOI:10.1080/14760584.2024.2367451
Samuel Bawa, Abrham Wondimu, Maarten J Postma, Raymond Hutubessy, Marinus van Hulst
{"title":"含麻疹成分疫苗 (MCV) 第二剂的经济评估:对现有证据的系统回顾。","authors":"Samuel Bawa, Abrham Wondimu, Maarten J Postma, Raymond Hutubessy, Marinus van Hulst","doi":"10.1080/14760584.2024.2367451","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The global measles incidence has decreased from 145 to 49 cases per 1 million population from 2000 to 2018, but evaluating the economic benefits of a second measles-containing vaccine (MCV2) is crucial. This study reviewed the evidence and quality of economic evaluation studies to guide MCV2 introduction.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The systematic review of model-based economic evaluation studies was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The search yielded 2231 articles, with 876 duplicates removed and 1355 articles screened, with nine studies included for final analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six studies reported a positive benefit-cost ratio with one resulting in net savings of $11.6 billion, and two studies estimated a 2-dose MMR vaccination program would save $119.24 to prevent one measles case, and a second dose could prevent 9,200 cases at 18 months, saving $548.19 per case. The most sensitive variables were the discount rate and vaccination administration cost.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Two MCV doses or a second opportunity with an additional dose of MCV were highly cost-beneficial and resulted in substantial cost savings compared to a single routine vaccine. But further research using high-quality model-based health economic evaluation studies of MCV2 should be made available to decision-makers.</p><p><strong>Prospero registration: </strong>CRD42020200669.</p>","PeriodicalId":12326,"journal":{"name":"Expert Review of Vaccines","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Economic evaluation of second measles containing vaccine (MCV) dose: a systematic review of available evidence.\",\"authors\":\"Samuel Bawa, Abrham Wondimu, Maarten J Postma, Raymond Hutubessy, Marinus van Hulst\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14760584.2024.2367451\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The global measles incidence has decreased from 145 to 49 cases per 1 million population from 2000 to 2018, but evaluating the economic benefits of a second measles-containing vaccine (MCV2) is crucial. This study reviewed the evidence and quality of economic evaluation studies to guide MCV2 introduction.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The systematic review of model-based economic evaluation studies was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The search yielded 2231 articles, with 876 duplicates removed and 1355 articles screened, with nine studies included for final analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Six studies reported a positive benefit-cost ratio with one resulting in net savings of $11.6 billion, and two studies estimated a 2-dose MMR vaccination program would save $119.24 to prevent one measles case, and a second dose could prevent 9,200 cases at 18 months, saving $548.19 per case. The most sensitive variables were the discount rate and vaccination administration cost.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Two MCV doses or a second opportunity with an additional dose of MCV were highly cost-beneficial and resulted in substantial cost savings compared to a single routine vaccine. But further research using high-quality model-based health economic evaluation studies of MCV2 should be made available to decision-makers.</p><p><strong>Prospero registration: </strong>CRD42020200669.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12326,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Expert Review of Vaccines\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Expert Review of Vaccines\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14760584.2024.2367451\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/26 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"IMMUNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert Review of Vaccines","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14760584.2024.2367451","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:从 2000 年到 2018 年,全球麻疹发病率已从每 100 万人口 145 例降至 49 例,但评估第二种含麻疹成分疫苗(MCV2)的经济效益至关重要。本研究回顾了经济评估研究的证据和质量,以指导MCV2的引入:方法:根据《系统综述和元分析首选报告项目》指南,对基于模型的经济评估研究进行了系统综述。搜索共获得 2231 篇文章,删除了 876 篇重复文章,筛选了 1355 篇文章,最终分析纳入了 9 项研究:据两项研究估计,接种两剂麻风腮疫苗可预防一例麻疹病例,节省 119.24 美元;接种第二剂疫苗可在 18 个月后预防 9200 例麻疹病例,每例节省 548.19 美元。最敏感的变量是贴现率和疫苗接种管理成本:与接种一次常规疫苗相比,接种两剂麻风腮疫苗或再接种一剂麻风腮疫苗具有很高的成本效益,可节省大量成本。但决策者应利用基于模型的高质量健康经济评估研究对 MCV2 进行进一步研究:CRD42020200669。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Economic evaluation of second measles containing vaccine (MCV) dose: a systematic review of available evidence.

Introduction: The global measles incidence has decreased from 145 to 49 cases per 1 million population from 2000 to 2018, but evaluating the economic benefits of a second measles-containing vaccine (MCV2) is crucial. This study reviewed the evidence and quality of economic evaluation studies to guide MCV2 introduction.

Methods: The systematic review of model-based economic evaluation studies was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The search yielded 2231 articles, with 876 duplicates removed and 1355 articles screened, with nine studies included for final analysis.

Results: Six studies reported a positive benefit-cost ratio with one resulting in net savings of $11.6 billion, and two studies estimated a 2-dose MMR vaccination program would save $119.24 to prevent one measles case, and a second dose could prevent 9,200 cases at 18 months, saving $548.19 per case. The most sensitive variables were the discount rate and vaccination administration cost.

Conclusions: Two MCV doses or a second opportunity with an additional dose of MCV were highly cost-beneficial and resulted in substantial cost savings compared to a single routine vaccine. But further research using high-quality model-based health economic evaluation studies of MCV2 should be made available to decision-makers.

Prospero registration: CRD42020200669.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Expert Review of Vaccines
Expert Review of Vaccines 医学-免疫学
CiteScore
9.10
自引率
3.20%
发文量
136
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Expert Review of Vaccines (ISSN 1476-0584) provides expert commentary on the development, application, and clinical effectiveness of new vaccines. Coverage includes vaccine technology, vaccine adjuvants, prophylactic vaccines, therapeutic vaccines, AIDS vaccines and vaccines for defence against bioterrorism. All articles are subject to rigorous peer-review. The vaccine field has been transformed by recent technological advances, but there remain many challenges in the delivery of cost-effective, safe vaccines. Expert Review of Vaccines facilitates decision making to drive forward this exciting field.
期刊最新文献
Hookworm vaccines: current and future directions. A descriptive review on the real-world impact of Moderna, inc. COVID-19 vaccines. Estimating the time required to reach HPV vaccination targets across Europe. Vaccination strategies for patients under monoclonal antibody and other biological treatments: an updated comprehensive review based on EMA authorizations to January 2024. Comparison of preclinical efficacy of immunotherapies against HPV-induced cancers.
×
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