Cost-effectiveness of measles elimination in Latin America and the Caribbean: a prospective analysis
Section snippets
Background
In 1994, the Americas set a goal of interrupting indigenous measles transmission in the Western Hemisphere by 2000 with the purpose of eventual elimination of measles in this region. Elimination activity had actually started as early as 1990 (see Fig. 1).
The Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) has developed an enhanced measles elimination strategy, which is built upon the poliomyelitis elimination strategy that resulted in the elimination of polio in the Americas and is currently being
Methods
PAHO’s measles elimination policy has three essential vaccination components [2], [6], [7], [8]. First, a one time only national ‘catch-up’ campaign targeting all children 1–14 years, irrespective of previous disease or vaccination history. Second, efforts are made to strengthen routine vaccination services to reach at least 95% of infants in each successive birth cohort. This effort is called the ‘keep-up’ effort and is the intensification of the measles part of the extended program for
Findings
In present value terms the cost of the elimination campaign is US$ 548 million, for the available data. Extrapolated to the entire LAC region, it is US$ 571 million. This cost should be understood as a cost that is dependent upon the present infrastructure set up for vaccination and as such it is an incremental cost. A detailed account of cost and effectiveness follows.
Interpretation
When all costs are discounted, a case was prevented at the cost of US$ 71.75 (US$ 102 with discounted effectiveness). That is for extra US$ 244 million spent in measles coverage 3.2 million cases are prevented. This reduction in measles cases induced 16,000 fewer deaths and occurred because US$ 244 million more was spent on vaccination. Each death was prevented at the cost of US$ 15,203 (US$ 20,525 with discounted effectiveness).
Conclusions
A report regarding the cost-effectiveness of polio in LAC region compared the extra cost incurred due to the elimination effort—consisting of EPI and periodic campaigns—and the cost savings that would ensue from having no polio cases to be treated [30]. That study relied on the assumption that the elimination of polio would be achieved in 5 years in LAC with routine polio vaccination in place thereafter. The cost of treatment for polio is significant and lifetime cost of support for paralyzed
Acknowledgements
The Authors are grateful to Dr. Jean Marc Olivé for his comments during the development of the protocol for this study and to Dr. Matilde Pinto for her insightful review of the economical analysis on the final draft of the paper.
References (32)
- et al.
Review of regional measles surveillance data in the Americas, 1996–1999
Lancet
(2000) - et al.
Measles elimination: progress and challenges
Vaccine
(1999) Economic aspect of vaccines and immunizations
C.R. Acad. Sci.
(1999)- et al.
A model to estimate the potential benefits of measles eradication for the United States
Vaccine
(1998) - et al.
Understanding DALYs
J. Health Econ.
(1997) - et al.
Eradication of wild poliovirus from the Americas: accute flaccid paralysis surveillance, 1988–1995
J. Infect. Dis.
(1997) - Center for Disease Control. Progress toward eradication of measles from the Americas. Morbidity and mortality weakly...
- Center for Disease Control. Progress toward interrupting indigenous transmission—region of the Americas, January...
- HPV, Pan American Health Organization....
- et al.
Measles eradication: experience in the Americas
Bull. World Health Org.
(1998)
Measles eradication in the Americas: evolving strategies
JAMA
Measles eradiation: experience in the Americas
JAMA
Role of schools in the transmission of measles in rural Senegal
Am. J. Epidem.
Cited by (37)
Occurrence of measles genotype D8 during a 2014 outbreak in Banjarmasin, South Kalimantan, Indonesia
2017, International Journal of Infectious DiseasesCitation Excerpt :Failure to maintain coverage with the vaccination will lead to a resurgence of measles.8 Moreover, the interval between the first and second dose of the vaccine will leave several birth cohorts protected with only one dose, which has only about 85% protection efficacy.9 According to RISKESDAS, a health survey performed by the Indonesian Ministry of Health in 2007, 2010, 2013, and 2014, measles vaccination coverage for babies 12–23 months of age in South Kalimantan decreased from 81.7% to 75.2%, 74.1%, and then 69.5%, respectively.2,10–12
Model-based impact and cost-effectiveness of cervical cancer prevention in sub-saharan Africa
2013, VaccineCitation Excerpt :We also confirmed the consistency of model-projected life expectancies against those estimated by the WHO [24] (i.e., internal validity). Since the price of the HPV vaccines may vary across countries, and programmatic and delivery costs for a pre-adolescent vaccine are not yet known, we estimated a composite cost of vaccination defined as the “cost per vaccinated girl”, which includes vaccine dosages, wastage of vaccine supplies, freight and supplies, administration, immunization support and programmatic costs [13,31–34]. For example, for a composite cost of I$10 per vaccinated girl, an approximate itemization of costs would include three doses of the vaccine at $2.00 per dose, wastage of $0.90, freight and supplies of $0.59, vaccine administration of I$0.50, and immunization support and programmatic costs of I$2.00.