Cargando…

Evaluating the neonatal BCG vaccination programme in Ireland

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the cost effectiveness of the current Irish programme of universal BCG vaccination of infants versus a programme which considered selectively vaccinating high risk infants using decision analytical modelling. METHODS: The efficacy of the BCG vaccine w...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Usher, Cara, Adams, Roisin, Schmitz, Susanne, Kieran, Jennifer, O’Flanagan, Darina, O’Donnell, Joan, Connolly, Kevin, Corcoran, Brenda, Butler, Karina, Barry, Michael, Walsh, Cathal
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4942954/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27413531
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13690-016-0141-0
_version_ 1782442509382713344
author Usher, Cara
Adams, Roisin
Schmitz, Susanne
Kieran, Jennifer
O’Flanagan, Darina
O’Donnell, Joan
Connolly, Kevin
Corcoran, Brenda
Butler, Karina
Barry, Michael
Walsh, Cathal
author_facet Usher, Cara
Adams, Roisin
Schmitz, Susanne
Kieran, Jennifer
O’Flanagan, Darina
O’Donnell, Joan
Connolly, Kevin
Corcoran, Brenda
Butler, Karina
Barry, Michael
Walsh, Cathal
author_sort Usher, Cara
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the cost effectiveness of the current Irish programme of universal BCG vaccination of infants versus a programme which considered selectively vaccinating high risk infants using decision analytical modelling. METHODS: The efficacy of the BCG vaccine was re-evaluated to inform a decision analytical model constructed to follow a birth cohort of vaccinated and unvaccinated infants over a 15 year time horizon. The number of life years gained (LYG) was the primary outcome measure and this was compared to the net cost of the vaccination strategies. RESULTS: In the base case analysis, the incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for the universal strategy and selective strategy vs no vaccination were €204,373/LYG and €143,233/LYG respectively. When comparing the incremental difference in moving from the universal to the selective strategy, the selective strategy costs €1,055,692 less per 4.8 life years lost per birth cohort. One way sensitivity analyses highlighted that a move from the universal to the selective strategy was particularly sensitive to the estimate of vaccine efficacy against deaths, the cost of administering the vaccine and the multiplier used to apportion risk of contracting tuberculosis. Probabilistic analysis suggested that a move from a universal based strategy to a selective based strategy could be deemed cost effective (probability of cost effectiveness is 76.8 %). CONCLUSION: The results of the study support the protective effect of the BCG vaccine in infants and quantified the cost effectiveness of the current BCG vaccination strategy and the decremental difference in moving to a selective strategy. This analysis highlights that the additional protection offered by the universal vaccination strategy is small compared to that of the selective strategy. Consideration should therefore be given to the implementation of a selective vaccination strategy, and diverting resources to improve TB case management and control. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13690-016-0141-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4942954
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49429542016-07-14 Evaluating the neonatal BCG vaccination programme in Ireland Usher, Cara Adams, Roisin Schmitz, Susanne Kieran, Jennifer O’Flanagan, Darina O’Donnell, Joan Connolly, Kevin Corcoran, Brenda Butler, Karina Barry, Michael Walsh, Cathal Arch Public Health Research BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the cost effectiveness of the current Irish programme of universal BCG vaccination of infants versus a programme which considered selectively vaccinating high risk infants using decision analytical modelling. METHODS: The efficacy of the BCG vaccine was re-evaluated to inform a decision analytical model constructed to follow a birth cohort of vaccinated and unvaccinated infants over a 15 year time horizon. The number of life years gained (LYG) was the primary outcome measure and this was compared to the net cost of the vaccination strategies. RESULTS: In the base case analysis, the incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for the universal strategy and selective strategy vs no vaccination were €204,373/LYG and €143,233/LYG respectively. When comparing the incremental difference in moving from the universal to the selective strategy, the selective strategy costs €1,055,692 less per 4.8 life years lost per birth cohort. One way sensitivity analyses highlighted that a move from the universal to the selective strategy was particularly sensitive to the estimate of vaccine efficacy against deaths, the cost of administering the vaccine and the multiplier used to apportion risk of contracting tuberculosis. Probabilistic analysis suggested that a move from a universal based strategy to a selective based strategy could be deemed cost effective (probability of cost effectiveness is 76.8 %). CONCLUSION: The results of the study support the protective effect of the BCG vaccine in infants and quantified the cost effectiveness of the current BCG vaccination strategy and the decremental difference in moving to a selective strategy. This analysis highlights that the additional protection offered by the universal vaccination strategy is small compared to that of the selective strategy. Consideration should therefore be given to the implementation of a selective vaccination strategy, and diverting resources to improve TB case management and control. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13690-016-0141-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-07-13 /pmc/articles/PMC4942954/ /pubmed/27413531 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13690-016-0141-0 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Usher, Cara
Adams, Roisin
Schmitz, Susanne
Kieran, Jennifer
O’Flanagan, Darina
O’Donnell, Joan
Connolly, Kevin
Corcoran, Brenda
Butler, Karina
Barry, Michael
Walsh, Cathal
Evaluating the neonatal BCG vaccination programme in Ireland
title Evaluating the neonatal BCG vaccination programme in Ireland
title_full Evaluating the neonatal BCG vaccination programme in Ireland
title_fullStr Evaluating the neonatal BCG vaccination programme in Ireland
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating the neonatal BCG vaccination programme in Ireland
title_short Evaluating the neonatal BCG vaccination programme in Ireland
title_sort evaluating the neonatal bcg vaccination programme in ireland
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4942954/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27413531
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13690-016-0141-0
work_keys_str_mv AT ushercara evaluatingtheneonatalbcgvaccinationprogrammeinireland
AT adamsroisin evaluatingtheneonatalbcgvaccinationprogrammeinireland
AT schmitzsusanne evaluatingtheneonatalbcgvaccinationprogrammeinireland
AT kieranjennifer evaluatingtheneonatalbcgvaccinationprogrammeinireland
AT oflanagandarina evaluatingtheneonatalbcgvaccinationprogrammeinireland
AT odonnelljoan evaluatingtheneonatalbcgvaccinationprogrammeinireland
AT connollykevin evaluatingtheneonatalbcgvaccinationprogrammeinireland
AT corcoranbrenda evaluatingtheneonatalbcgvaccinationprogrammeinireland
AT butlerkarina evaluatingtheneonatalbcgvaccinationprogrammeinireland
AT barrymichael evaluatingtheneonatalbcgvaccinationprogrammeinireland
AT walshcathal evaluatingtheneonatalbcgvaccinationprogrammeinireland