Cost of pneumococcal infections and cost-effectiveness analysis of pneumococcal vaccination at risk adults and elderly in Turkey.

Levent Akin, Mehmet Kaya, Serdar Altinel, Laure Durand
Author Information
  1. Levent Akin: Hacettepe University Department of Public Health, Ankara, Turkey.

Abstract

Pneumococcal infections have a substantial burden in Turkey, particularly in the elderly (> 60 years) and at-risk adults (18-59 years). VCR are low at approximately 2%. The first aim of this study was the evaluation of the burden of pneumococcal infections (pneumonia and bacteremia) from a public payer perspective in elderly and at-risk adults. The second aim was the evaluation of cost effectiveness of implementing a large PPV program in these populations. A decision tree model was employed using demographic and epidemiological input obtained from Turkish official sources and international literature. Vaccination was assumed to protect for 5 years with 60% and 50% effectiveness against BPP in elderly and at-risk adults respectively. Vaccination effectiveness of 21% against NBPP was assumed for both populations. Costs input were obtained from a previous study conducted between 2002 and 2008 in a public university hospital in Ankara, Turkey. Univariate sensitivity analyses and Monte-Carlo simulations were performed. The vaccination program was cost effective and cost saving compared to no vaccination, pneumococcal vaccination with 60% coverage led to a mean of 4,695 LYG in the elderly and 2,134 LYG in at-risk adults with 40% coverage. Mean incremental savings reached 45.4 million YTL in the elderly and 21.8 million YTL in at-risk adults. This analysis suggests that pneumococcal vaccination of elderly and at-risk adults is associated with a positive return on investment from a public payer perspective and supports the continued recommendation of pneumococcal vaccines, as well as their full funding in Turkey.

References

  1. Arch Intern Med. 2001 Jan 8;161(1):111-20 [PMID: 11146707]
  2. Vaccine. 2008 Mar 10;26(11):1420-31 [PMID: 18272262]
  3. Eur J Epidemiol. 2004;19(4):365-75 [PMID: 15180107]
  4. Drugs Aging. 1999;15 Suppl 1:21-30 [PMID: 10690792]
  5. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2008 May;29(5):385-94 [PMID: 18521990]
  6. MMWR Recomm Rep. 1997 Apr 4;46(RR-8):1-24 [PMID: 9132580]
  7. Pharmacoeconomics. 2001;19(2):215-22 [PMID: 11284385]
  8. Vaccine. 2009 Mar 4;27(10):1504-10 [PMID: 19171174]
  9. Clin Infect Dis. 2004 Dec 1;39(11):1642-50 [PMID: 15578365]
  10. Int J Epidemiol. 2005 Jun;34(3):565-74 [PMID: 15764694]
  11. Vaccine. 2004 Aug 13;22(23-24):3214-24 [PMID: 15297076]
  12. Eur J Pediatr. 2002 Apr;161(4):188-95 [PMID: 12014384]
  13. Clin Infect Dis. 2006 Oct 1;43(7):860-8 [PMID: 16941367]
  14. JAMA. 1997 Oct 22-29;278(16):1333-9 [PMID: 9343464]
  15. BMC Infect Dis. 2008 Apr 23;8:53 [PMID: 18433473]
  16. Wkly Epidemiol Rec. 2008 Oct 17;83(42):373-84 [PMID: 18927997]
  17. N Engl J Med. 1991 Nov 21;325(21):1453-60 [PMID: 1944423]
  18. Lancet Infect Dis. 2008 Jul;8(7):405-6 [PMID: 18582832]
  19. J Infect. 2009 Jun;58(6):446-58 [PMID: 19446340]
  20. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Jan 23;(1):CD000422 [PMID: 18253977]
  21. Vaccine. 2007 Jan 5;25(3):458-65 [PMID: 17049685]
  22. Clin Infect Dis. 2008 Nov 15;47(10):1328-38 [PMID: 18844484]
  23. Euro Surveill. 2006 Sep;11(9):171-8 [PMID: 17075159]
  24. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2002 Mar 15;165(6):766-72 [PMID: 11897642]
  25. Clin Infect Dis. 2001 Sep 1;33(5):662-75 [PMID: 11486289]
  26. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2007 Aug;26(8):531-40 [PMID: 17570001]
  27. Clin Infect Dis. 2001 Dec 15;33(12):2078-9 [PMID: 11700581]
  28. Clin Infect Dis. 2005 May 1;40(9):1250-7 [PMID: 15825026]
  29. Vaccine. 1997 Feb;15(3):317-20 [PMID: 9139492]
  30. N Engl J Med. 2003 May 1;348(18):1747-55 [PMID: 12724480]
  31. JAMA. 1993 Oct 20;270(15):1826-31 [PMID: 8411526]
  32. CMAJ. 2009 Jan 6;180(1):48-58 [PMID: 19124790]
  33. BMC Infect Dis. 2010 Mar 18;10:73 [PMID: 20298596]
  34. JAMA. 2001 Apr 4;285(13):1729-35 [PMID: 11277827]
  35. Vaccine. 2004 Feb 25;22(8):927-46 [PMID: 15161070]
  36. BMJ. 2010 Jun 02;340:c2509 [PMID: 20519267]

MeSH Term

Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Bacteremia
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Pneumococcal Infections
Pneumococcal Vaccines
Pneumonia, Pneumococcal
Turkey
Vaccination
Young Adult

Chemicals

Pneumococcal Vaccines

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0elderlyadultsat-riskpneumococcalvaccinationTurkeyinfectionsyearspubliccosteffectivenessburdenaimstudyevaluationpayerperspectiveprogrampopulationsinputobtainedVaccinationassumed60%coverage4LYGmillionYTLanalysisPneumococcalsubstantialparticularly>6018-59VCRlowapproximately2%firstpneumoniabacteremiasecondimplementinglargePPVdecisiontreemodelemployedusingdemographicepidemiologicalTurkishofficialsourcesinternationalliteratureprotect550%BPPrespectively21%NBPPCostspreviousconducted20022008universityhospitalAnkaraUnivariatesensitivityanalysesMonte-Carlosimulationsperformedeffectivesavingcomparedledmean695213440%Meanincrementalsavingsreached45218suggestsassociatedpositivereturninvestmentsupportscontinuedrecommendationvaccineswellfullfundingCostcost-effectivenessrisk

Similar Articles

Cited By