Estimating the costs and health benefits of water and sanitation improvements at global level

The aim of this study was to estimate the costs and the health benefits of the following interventions: increasing access to improved water supply and sanitation facilities, increasing access to in house piped water and sewerage connection, and providing household water treatment, in ten WHO sub-regions. The cost-effectiveness of each intervention was assessed in terms of US dollars per disability adjusted life year (DALY) averted. This analysis found that almost all interventions were cost-effective, especially in developing countries with high mortality rates. The estimated cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) varied between US$20 per DALY averted for disinfection at point of use to US$13,000 per DALY averted for improved water and sanitation facilities. While increasing access to piped water supply and sewage connections on plot was the intervention that had the largest health impact across all sub-regions, household water treatment was found to be the most cost-effective intervention. A policy shift to include better household water quality management to complement the continuing expansion of coverage and upgrading of services would appear to be a cost-effective health intervention in many developing countries.     

Global cost-benefit analysis of water supply and sanitation interventions

The aim of this study was to estimate the economic benefits and costs of a range of interventions to improve access to water supply and sanitation facilities in the developing world. Results are presented for eleven developing country WHO sub-regions as well as at the global level, in United States Dollars (US$) for the year 2000. Five different types of water supply and sanitation improvement were modelled: achieving the water millennium development goal of reducing by half in 2015 those without improved water supply in the year 1990; achieving the combined water supply and sanitation MDG; universal basic access to water supply and sanitation; universal basic access plus water purification at the point-of-use; and regulated piped water supply and sewer connection. Predicted reductions in the incidence of diarrhoeal disease were calculated based on the expected population receiving these interventions. The costs of the interventions included estimations of the full investment and annual running costs. The benefits of the interventions included time savings due to easier access, gain in productive time and reduced health care costs saved due to less illness, and prevented deaths. The results show that all water and sanitation improvements are cost-beneficial in all developing world sub-regions. In developing regions, the return on a US$1 investment was in the range US$5 to US$46, depending on the intervention. For the least developed regions, investing every US$1 to meet the combined water supply and sanitation MDG lead to a return of at least US$5 (AFR-D, AFR-E, SEAR-D) or US$12 (AMR-B; EMR-B; WPR-B). The main contributor to economic benefits was time savings associated with better access to water and sanitation services, contributing at least 80% to overall economic benefits. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that even under pessimistic data assumptions the potential economic benefits outweighed the costs in all developing world regions. Further country case-studies are recommended as a follow up to this global analysis.     

A reassessment of the cost-effectiveness of water and sanitation interventions in programmes for controlling childhood diarrhoea

Cost-effectiveness analysis indicates that some water supply and sanitation (WSS) interventions are highly cost-effective for the control of diarrhoea among under-5-year-olds, on a par with oral rehydration therapy. These are relatively inexpensive "software-related" interventions such as hygiene education, social marketing of good hygiene practices, regulation of drinking-water, and monitoring of water quality. Such interventions are needed to ensure that the potentially positive health impacts of WSS infrastructure are fully realized in practice. The perception that WSS programmes are not a cost-effective use of health sector resources has arisen from three factors: an assumption that all WSS interventions involve construction of physical infrastructure, a misperception of the health sector's role in WSS programmes, and a misunderstanding of the scope of cost-effectiveness analysis. WSS infrastructure ("hardware") is generally built and operated by public works agencies and financed by construction grants, operational subsidies, user fees and property taxes. Health sector agencies should provide "software" such as project design, hygiene education, and water quality regulation. Cost-effectiveness analysis should measure the incremental health impacts attributable to health sector investments, using the actual call on health sector resources as the measure of cost. The cost-effectiveness of a set of hardware and software combinations is estimated, using US$ per case averted, US$ per death averted, and US$ per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) saved.     

Global cost-benefit analysis of water supply and sanitation interventions

The aim of this study was to estimate the economic benefits and costs of a range of interventions to improve access to water supply and sanitation facilities in the developing world. Results are presented for eleven developing country WHO sub-regions as well as at the global level, in United States Dollars (US$) for the year 2000. Five different types of water supply and sanitation improvement were modelled: achieving the water millennium development goal of reducing by half in 2015 those without improved water supply in the year 1990; achieving the combined water supply and sanitation MDG; universal basic access to water supply and sanitation; universal basic access plus water purification at the point-of-use; and regulated piped water supply and sewer connection. Predicted reductions in the incidence of diarrhoeal disease were calculated based on the expected population receiving these interventions. The costs of the interventions included estimations of the full investment and annual running costs. The benefits of the interventions included time savings due to easier access, gain in productive time and reduced health care costs saved due to less illness, and prevented deaths. The results show that all water and sanitation improvements are cost-beneficial in all developing world sub-regions. In developing regions, the return on a US$1 investment was in the range US$5 to US$46, depending on the intervention. For the least developed regions, investing every US$1 to meet the combined water supply and sanitation MDG lead to a return of at least US$5 (AFR-D, AFR-E, SEAR-D) or US$12 (AMR-B; EMR-B; WPR-B). The main contributor to economic benefits was time savings associated with better access to water and sanitation services, contributing at least 80% to overall economic benefits. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that even under pessimistic data assumptions the potential economic benefits outweighed the costs in all developing world regions. Further country case-studies are recommended as a follow up to this global analysis.     

Economic evaluation of hepatitis B vaccination in low-income countries: using cost-effectiveness affordability curves

OBJECTIVE: We sought to describe a method that explicitly considers both a health-care programmes cost-effectiveness and its affordability. For illustration, we apply the method to the programme to vaccinate infants against hepatitis B in the Gambia. METHODS: We synthesized selected data and developed a computer-based model from the societal and payer perspectives to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of routine infant vaccination against hepatitis B in the Gambia compared with no vaccination. The primary outcome measure was cost per averted disability-adjusted life year (DALY), which was expressed in 2002 US dollars. We used Monte Carlo methods for uncertainty analysis to examine the affordability of the programme from the payers perspective, and we derived an affordability curve and cost-effectiveness affordability curves for the programme. FINDINGS: In the Gambia, vaccinating infants against hepatitis B is highly cost-effective. Compared with offering no intervention, the vaccination programme would cost US$ 28 per DALY averted from the societal perspective or US$ 47 per DALY averted from the payers perspective. The programme also has the potential to be affordable, starting at a relatively low budget of US$ 160,000 per year. Combining the two dimensions of the outcome measure, the probability that vaccinating infants would be both cost-effective and affordable is 40% at an annual programme budget of US$ 182,000 (the estimated total programme cost from the payers perspective), given a threshold cost-effectiveness value of US$ 47 per DALY averted. CONCLUSION: In the face of uncertainties about both the health and economic consequences of a vaccine programme, as well as the availability and magnitude of resources needed to fund the programme, cost-effectiveness affordability curves can provide information to decision-makers about the probability that a programme will be both cost-effective and affordable: these are distinct but equally relevant considerations in resource-poor settings.     

Prevention of hepatitis B mother-to-child transmission in Namibia: A cost-effectiveness analysis

Despite access to a safe and effective vaccine, mother-to-child transmission (MTCT) of hepatitis B virus (HBV) persists in Africa. This is of concern since perinatally-infected infants are at highest risk of developing hepatocellular carcinoma, a life-threatening consequence of chronic HBV infection. While tools to prevent HBV MTCT are available, the cost implications of these interventions need consideration prior to implementation. A Markov model was developed to determine the costs and health outcomes of (1) universal HBV birth dose (BD) vaccination, (2) universal BD vaccination and targeted hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG), (3) maternal antiviral prophylaxis using sequential HBV viral load testing added to HBV BD vaccination and HBIG, and (4) maternal antiviral prophylaxis using sequential HBeAg testing combined with HBV BD vaccination and HBIG. Health outcomes were assessed as the number of paediatric infections averted and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted. Primary cost data included consumables, human resources, and hospital facilities. HBV epidemiology, transitions probabilities, disability weights, and the risks of HBV MTCT were extracted from the literature. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated to compare successive more expensive interventions to the previous less expensive one. One-way sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the robustness of the model’s outputs. At the Namibian cost/DALY averted threshold of US$3 142, the (1) BD vaccination + targeted HBIG, and (2) maternal antiviral prophylaxis with sequential HBeAg testing interventions were cost-effective. These interventions had ICERs equal to US$1909.03/DALY and US$2598.90/DALY averted, respectively. In terms of effectiveness, the maternal antiviral prophylaxis with sequential HBeAg testing intervention was the intervention of choice. The analysis showed that elimination of HBV MTCT is achievable using maternal antiviral prophylaxis with active and passive immunization. There is an urgent need for low cost diagnostic tests to identify those women who will most benefit from drug therapy to attain this laudable goal.     

Prevention and treatment of cardiovascular disease in Ethiopia: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Background

The coverage of prevention and treatment strategies for ischemic heart disease and stroke is very low in Ethiopia. In view of Ethiopia’s meager healthcare budget, it is important to identify the most cost-effective interventions for further scale-up. This paper’s objective is to assess cost-effectiveness of prevention and treatment of ischemic heart disease (IHD) and stroke in an Ethiopian setting.

Methods

Fifteen single interventions and sixteen intervention packages were assessed from a healthcare provider perspective. The World Health Organization’s Choosing Interventions that are Cost-Effective model for cardiovascular disease was updated with available country-specific inputs, including demography, mortality and price of traded and non-traded goods. Costs and health benefits were discounted at 3 % per year. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are reported in US$ per disability adjusted life year (DALY) averted. Sensitivity analysis was undertaken to assess robustness of our results.

Results

Combination drug treatment for individuals having >35 % absolute risk of a CVD event in the next 10 years is the most cost-effective intervention. This intervention costs US$67 per DALY averted and about US$7 million annually. Treatment of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) (costing US$1000–US$7530 per DALY averted) and secondary prevention of IHD and stroke (costing US$1060–US$10,340 per DALY averted) become more efficient when delivered in integrated packages. At an annual willingness-to-pay (WTP) level of about US$3 million, a package consisting of aspirin, streptokinase, ACE-inhibitor and beta-blocker for AMI has the highest probability of being most cost-effective, whereas as WTP increases to > US$7 million, combination drug treatment to individuals having >35 % absolute risk stands out as the most cost-effective strategy. Cost-effectiveness ratios were relatively more sensitive to halving the effectiveness estimates as compared with doubling the price of drugs and laboratory tests.

Conclusions

In Ethiopia, the escalating burden of CVD and its risk factors warrants timely action. We have demonstrated that selected CVD intervention packages could be scaled up at a modest budget increase. The level of willingness-to-pay has important implications for interventions’ probability of being cost-effective. The study provides valuable evidence for setting priorities in an essential healthcare package for CVD in Ethiopia.

     

Cost-effectiveness of community-based management of acute malnutrition in Malawi

This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of community-based management of acute malnutrition (CMAM) to prevent deaths due to severe acute malnutrition among children under-five. The analysis used a decision tree model to compare the costs and effects of two options to treat severe acute malnutrition: existing health services with CMAM vs existing health services without CMAM. The model used outcome and cost data from a CMAM programme in Dowa district, Malawi and a set of key assumptions regarding treatment-seeking behaviour and mortality outcomes. Under our 'base case' scenario, we found that CMAM cost US$42 per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted (2007 US$) and US$493 per DALY averted under an assumed 'worst case' scenario for each variable. The results suggest that CMAM was highly cost-effective in the 'base case' as defined by the World Health Organization, as the cost per DALY falls well below Malawi's 2007 gross national income (GNI) per capita of US$250, and is within the range of DALYs reported for other child health interventions. Under a hypothetical 'worst case' for all variables, the model indicates CMAM is still cost-effective. The results indicate the decision to scale-up CMAM within essential health services in Dowa was a cost-effective one and that scaling up CMAM in similar contexts is also likely to be cost-effective. However, several contextual and programmatic factors should be considered when generalizing to diverse contexts.     

The cost-effectiveness of introducing hepatitis B vaccine into infant immunization services in Mozambique

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of introducing hepatitis B vaccine into routine infant immunization services in Mozambique, which took place in the year 2001. METHODS: A decision analytic model was used to estimate the impact of hepatitis B vaccination. This model was developed for the WHO to estimate the global burden of disease from hepatitis B. Cost data of vaccine delivery and medical treatment related to hepatitis B infection were collected for the analysis. FINDINGS: The introduction of hepatitis B vaccine has increased the annual budget for immunization services by approximately 56%. It is predicted that more than 4000 future deaths are averted annually by the intervention. In the base case scenario, the incremental costs per undiscounted deaths averted amount to US$436, and the costs per undiscounted DALY averted amount to US$36. Since the major impact of hepatitis B vaccination will not start to be evident for at least another 40 years (deaths from hepatitis B mainly occur between 40-60 years of age), the cost per DALY averted rises to US$47, when using a discount rate of 3% on health effects. We found that the monovalent hepatitis B vaccine was considerably more cost-effective than the hepatitis B vaccine in combination with DTP. INTERPRETATION: If policy makers value future health benefits equal to current benefits, the cost-effectiveness of infant hepatitis B vaccination is in the range of other primary health care interventions for which similar analysis has been undertaken.     

Cost-effectiveness analysis of humanitarian relief interventions: visceral leishmaniasis treatment in the Sudan.

Spending by aid agencies on emergencies has quadrupled over the last decade, to over US$6 billion. To date, cost-effectiveness has seldom been considered in the prioritization and evaluation of emergency interventions. The sheer volume of resources spent on humanitarian aid and the chronicity of many humanitarian interventions call for more attention to be paid to the issue of 'value for money'. In this paper we present data from a major humanitarian crisis, an epidemic of visceral leishmaniasis (VL) in war-torn Sudan. The special circumstances provided us, in retrospect, with unusually accurate data on excess mortality, costs of the intervention and its effects, thus allowing us to express cost-effectiveness as the cost per Disability Adjusted Life Year (DALY) averted. The cost-effectiveness ratio, of US$18.40 per DALY (uncertainty range between US$13.53 and US$27.63), places the treatment of VL in Sudan among health interventions considered 'very good value for money' (interventions of less than US$25 per DALY). We discuss the usefulness of this analysis to the internal management of the VL programme, the procurement of funds for the programme, and more generally, to priority setting in humanitarian relief interventions. We feel that in evaluations of emergency interventions attempts could be made more often to perform cost-effectiveness analyses, including the use of DALYs, provided that the outcomes of these analyses are seen in the broad context of the emergency situation and its consequences on the affected population. This paper provides a first contribution to what is hoped to become an international database of cost-effectiveness studies of health interventions during relief operations, which use a comparable measure of health outcome such as the DALY.     

Human health benefits from livestock vaccination for brucellosis: case study

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the economic benefit, cost-effectiveness, and distribution of benefit of improving human health in Mongolia through the control of brucellosis by mass vaccination of livestock. METHODS: Cost-effectiveness and economic benefit for human society and the agricultural sector of mass vaccination against brucellosis was modelled. The intervention consisted of a planned 10-year livestock mass vaccination campaign using Rev-1 livestock vaccine for small ruminants and S19 livestock vaccine for cattle. Cost-effectiveness, expressed as cost per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted, was the primary outcome. FINDINGS: In a scenario of 52% reduction of brucellosis transmission between animals achieved by mass vaccination, a total of 49,027 DALYs could be averted. Estimated intervention costs were US$ 8.3 million, and the overall benefit was US$ 26.6 million. This results in a net present value of US$ 18.3 million and an average benefit-cost ratio for society of 3.2 (2.27-4.37). If the costs of the intervention were shared between the sectors in proportion to the benefit to each, the public health sector would contribute 11%, which gives a cost-effectiveness of US$ 19.1 per DALY averted (95% confidence interval 5.3-486.8). If private economic gain because of improved human health was included, the health sector should contribute 42% to the intervention costs and the cost-effectiveness would decrease to US$ 71.4 per DALY averted. CONCLUSION: If the costs of vaccination of livestock against brucellosis were allocated to all sectors in proportion to the benefits, the intervention might be profitable and cost effective for the agricultural and health sectors.     

Cost-effectiveness of the introduction of two-dose bi-valent (Cervarix) and quadrivalent (Gardasil) HPV vaccination for adolescent girls in Bangladesh

BackgroundCervical cancer is one of the most prevalent cancers in women caused by the human papillomavirus (HPV) that leads to a substantial disease burden for health systems. Prevention through vaccination can significantly reduce the prevalence of cervical cancer. The objective of this study is to evaluate the potential health and economic impacts of introducing two-dose bivalent (Cervarix) and quadrivalent (Gardasil) HPV vaccines in Bangladesh.MethodsThe study uses the Papillomavirus Rapid Interface for Modelling and Economics (PRIME) model to assess the cost-effectiveness of introducing HPV vaccination. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were estimated per disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted using the cost-effectiveness threshold (CET). The analyses were done from a health system perspective in terms of vaccine delivery routes.ResultsIntroduction of bi-valent HPV vaccination was found highly cost-effective (ICER = US$488/DALY) at Gavi (The Vaccine Alliance for Vaccines and Immunizations) negotiated prices. The value of ICERs were US$710, US$356 and US$397 per DALY averted for school-based, health facility-based, and outreach-based programs, respectively, which is consistent with the CET range (US$67 to US$854). However, bivalent and quadrivalent vaccines at listed prices were not found cost-effective, with ICERs of US$1405 and US$3250 per DALY averted, respectively, that exceeds the CETs values.ConclusionsIntroducing a two-dose bi-valent HPV vaccination program is cost-effective in Bangladesh at Gavi negotiated prices. Vaccine price is the dominating parameter for the cost-effectiveness of bivalent and quadrivalent vaccines. Both vaccines are not cost-effective at listed prices in Bangladesh. The evaluation highlights that introducing the two-dose bivalent HPV vaccine at Gavi negotiated prices into a national immunization program in Bangladesh is economically viable to reduce the burden of cervical cancer.     

Comparative impact assessment of child pneumonia interventions

Objective

To compare the cost-effectiveness of interventions to reduce pneumonia mortality through risk reduction, immunization and case management.

Methods

Country-specific pneumonia burden estimates and intervention costs from WHO were used to review estimates of pneumonia risk in children under 5 years of age and the efficacy of interventions (case management, pneumonia-related vaccines, improved nutrition and reduced indoor air pollution from household solid fuels). We calculated health benefits (disability-adjusted life years, DALYs, averted) and intervention costs over a period of 10 years for 40 countries, accounting for 90% of pneumonia child deaths.

Findings

Solid fuel use contributes 30% (90% confidence interval: 18–44) to the burden of childhood pneumonia. Efficacious community-based treatment, promotion of exclusive breastfeeding, zinc supplementation and Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) and Streptococcus pneumoniae immunization through existing programmes showed cost-effectiveness ratios of 10–60 International dollars (I$) per DALY in low-income countries and less than I$ 120 per DALY in middle-income countries. Low-emission biomass stoves and cleaner fuels may be cost-effective in low-income regions. Facility-based treatment is potentially cost-effective, with ratios of I$ 60–120 per DALY. The cost-effectiveness of community case management depends on home visit cost.

Conclusion

Vaccines against Hib and S. pneumoniae, efficacious case management, breastfeeding promotion and zinc supplementation are cost-effective in reducing pneumonia mortality. Environmental and nutritional interventions reduce pneumonia and provide other benefits. These strategies combined may reduce total child mortality by 17%.     

Cost-effectiveness and economic benefits of vaccines in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review

Background

Public health interventions that prevent mortality and morbidity have greatly increased over the past decade. Immunization is one of these preventive interventions, with a potential to bring economic benefits beyond just health benefits. While vaccines are considered to be a cost-effective public health intervention, implementation has become increasingly challenging. As vaccine costs rise and competing priorities increase, economic evidence is likely to play an increasingly important role in vaccination decisions.

Methods

To assist policy decisions today and potential investments in the future, we provide a systematic review of the literature on the cost-effectiveness and economic benefits of vaccines in low- and middle-income countries from 2000 to 2010. The review identified 108 relevant articles from 51 countries spanning 23 vaccines from three major electronic databases (Pubmed, Embase and Econlit).

Results

Among the 44 articles that reported costs per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted, vaccines cost less than or equal to $100 per DALY averted in 23 articles (52%). Vaccines cost less than $500 per DALY averted in 34 articles (77%), and less than $1000 per DALY averted in 38 articles (86%) in one of the scenarios. 24 articles (22%) examined broad level economic benefits of vaccines such as greater future wage-earning capacity and cost savings from averting disease outbreaks. 60 articles (56%) gathered data from a primary source. There were little data on long-term and societal economic benefits such as morbidity-related productivity gains, averting catastrophic health expenditures, growth in gross domestic product (GDP), and economic implications of demographic changes resulting from vaccination.

Conclusions

This review documents the available evidence and shows that vaccination in low- and middle-income countries brings important economic benefits. The cost-effectiveness studies reviewed suggest to policy makers that vaccines are an efficient investment. This review further highlights key gaps in the available literature that would benefit from additional research, especially in the area of evaluating the broader economic benefits of vaccination in the developing world.     

Potential health impact and cost-effectiveness of bivalent human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination in Afghanistan

IntroductionHuman papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination has not been introduced in many countries in South-Central Asia, including Afghanistan, despite the sub-region having the highest incidence rate of cervical cancer in Asia. This study estimates the potential health impact and cost-effectiveness of HPV vaccination in Afghanistan to inform national decision-making.MethodAn Excel-based static cohort model was used to estimate the lifetime costs and health outcomes of vaccinating a single cohort of 9-year-old girls in the year 2018 with the bivalent HPV vaccine, compared to no vaccination. We also explored a scenario with a catch-up campaign for girls aged 10–14 years. Input parameters were based on local sources, published literature, or assumptions when no data was available. The primary outcome measure was the discounted cost per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted, evaluated from both government and societal perspectives.ResultsVaccinating a single cohort of 9-year-old girls against HPV in Afghanistan could avert 1718 cervical cancer cases, 125 hospitalizations, and 1612 deaths over the lifetime of the cohort. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was US$426 per DALY averted from the government perspective and US$400 per DALY averted from the societal perspective. The estimated annual cost of the HPV vaccination program (US$3,343,311) represents approximately 3.53% of the country′s total immunization budget for 2018 or 0.13% of total health expenditures.ConclusionIn Afghanistan, HPV vaccine introduction targeting a single cohort is potentially cost-effective (0.7 times the GDP per capita of $586) from both the government and societal perspective with additional health benefits generated by a catch-up campaign, depending on the government′s willingness to pay for the projected health outcomes.     

Application of cost-effectiveness analysis of health care interventions in developing countries. A case study in Mauritius

OBJECTIVE: Cost-effectiveness analysis is a tool to help inform the decision maker of efficient allocation of scarce health care resources and its application has increased in developing countries during the past decade. There are, however, a variety of different approaches used to calculate cost-effectiveness ratios, given the range and the controversies surrounding the use of some components of total cost, depending on the constraints faced by various decision-making bodies. This study is an investigation of cost-effectiveness of both currently delivered and prospective health interventions in Mauritius to set priorities and assess allocative efficiency by taking into account such constraints. METHODS: Resource use and unit cost data were collected from the representative health facilities and the Ministry of Health to estimate costs of each health intervention per person. Effectiveness of each intervention was estimated from the results of the national burden of disease study and the efficacy database compiled for this exercise. Several types of cost-effectiveness were calculated for each intervention according to its characteristics and the constraints imposed by the existing infrastructures and other health interventions. RESULTS: Cost-effectiveness ratios with and without the decision maker's constraints differed significantly. Infrastructure-constrained average cost-effectiveness of thirteen currently delivered and twenty one prospective interventions ranged from $127 to $92,949 and from $77 to $66,302 per DALY averted, respectively. Incremental cost-effectiveness of the prospective interventions was from $83 to $70,553. Among the currently delivered interventions, those for perinatal disorders, mental illness, and ischemic heart disease were particularly less cost-effective than the prospective interventions. Sensitivity analysis of both effectiveness and discount rates did not change the cost-effectiveness ranking significantly. CONCLUSION: The present study showed that cost-effectiveness ratios differ significantly depending on the decision maker's constraints and that an interpretation of each cost-effectiveness study should be made with great caution when implementing its results in practice. Both average cost-effectiveness of the currently delivered interventions and incremental cost-effectiveness of the prospective interventions suggest that there is an allocative inefficiency among the currently delivered health interventions in Mauritius and a possibility of enhancing allocative efficiency through introducing alternative interventions.     

Cost-effectiveness of rotavirus vaccination in Mozambique

IntroductionRotavirus is one of the most common cause of severe gastroenteritis in children, with the largest mortality burden in low- and middle-income countries. To prevent rotavirus gastroenteritis, Mozambique introduced ROTARIX® vaccine in 2015, however, its cost-effectiveness has never been established in the country. In 2018, additional vaccines became available globally. This study estimates the cost-effectiveness of the recently introduced ROTARIX in Mozambique and compares the cost-effectiveness of ROTARIX®, ROTAVAC®, and ROTASIIL® to inform future use.MethodsWe used a decision-support model to calculate the potential cost-effectiveness of vaccination with ROTARIX compared to no vaccination over a five-year period (2016–2020) and to compare the cost-effectiveness of ROTARIX, ROTAVAC, and ROTASIIL to no vaccination and to each other over a ten-year period (2021–2030). The primary outcome was the incremental cost per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted from a government perspective. We assessed uncertainty through sensitivity analyses.ResultsFrom 2016 to 2020, we estimate the vaccine program with ROTARIX cost US$12.3 million, prevented 4,628 deaths, and averted US$3.1 million in healthcare costs. The cost per DALY averted was US$70. From 2021 to 2030, we estimate all three vaccines could prevent 9,000 deaths and avert US$7.8 million in healthcare costs. With Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (Gavi) support, ROTARIX would have the lowest vaccine program cost (US$31 million) and 98 % probability of being cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of 0.5x GDP per capita. Without Gavi support, ROTASIIL would have the lowest vaccine program cost (US$75.8 million) and 30 % probability of being cost-effective at the same threshold.ConclusionROTARIX vaccination had a substantial public health impact in Mozambique between 2016 and 2020. ROTARIX is currently estimated to be the most cost-effective product, but the choice of vaccine should be re-evaluated as more evidence emerges on the price, incremental delivery cost, wastage, and impact associated with each of the different rotavirus vaccines.     

Cost-effectiveness of dengue vaccination in ten endemic countries

Following publication of results from two phase-3 clinical trials in 10 countries or territories, endemic countries began licensing the first dengue vaccine in 2015. Using a published mathematical model, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of dengue vaccination in populations similar to those at the trial sites in those same Latin American and Asian countries. Our main scenarios (30-year horizon, 80% coverage) entailed 3-dose routine vaccinations costing US$20/dose beginning at age 9, potentially supplemented by catch-up programs of 4- or 8-year cohorts. We obtained illness costs per case, dengue mortality, vaccine wastage, and vaccine administration costs from the literature. We estimated that routine vaccination would reduce yearly direct and indirect illness cost per capita by 22% (from US$10.51 to US$8.17) in the Latin American countries and by 23% (from US$5.78 to US$4.44) in the Asian countries. Using a health system perspective, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) averaged US$4,216/disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted in the five Latin American countries (range: US$666/DALY in Puerto Rico to US$5,865/DALY in Mexico). In the five Asian countries, the ICER averaged US$3,751/DALY (range: US$1,935/DALY in Malaysia to US$5,101/DALY in the Philippines). From a health system perspective, the vaccine proved to be highly cost effective (ICER under one times the per capita GDP) in seven countries and cost effective (ICER 1–3 times the per capita GDP) in the remaining three countries. From a societal perspective, routine vaccination proved cost-saving in three countries. Including catch-up campaigns gave similar ICERs. Thus, this vaccine could have a favorable economic value in sites similar to those in the trials.     

Orthopaedic Trauma Care in Haiti: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of an Innovative Surgical Residency Program

ObjectiveIn an effort to sustainably strengthen orthopaedic trauma care in Haiti, a 2-year Orthopaedic Trauma Care Specialist (OTCS) program for Haitian physicians has been developed. The program will provide focused training in orthopaedic trauma surgery and fracture care utilizing a train-the-trainer approach. The purpose of this analysis was to calculate the cost-effectiveness of the program relative to its potential to decrease disability in the Haitian population.MethodsUsing established methodology originally outlined in the World Health Organization's Global Burden of Disease project, a cost-effectiveness analysis was performed for the OTCS program in Haiti. Costs and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) averted were estimated per fellow trained in the OTCS program by using a 20-year career time horizon. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was used to simultaneously test the joint uncertainty of the cost and averted DALY estimates. A willingness-to-pay threshold of $1200 per DALY averted, equal to the gross domestic product per capita in Haiti, was selected on the basis of World Health Organization's definition of highly cost-effective health interventions.ResultsThe OTCS program results in an incremental cost of $1,542,544 ± $109,134 and 12,213 ± 2,983 DALYs averted per fellow trained. The cost-effectiveness ratio of $133.97 ± $34.71 per DALY averted is well below the threshold of $1200 per DALY averted. Furthermore, sensitivity analysis suggests that implementing the OTCS program is the economically preferred strategy with more than 95% probability at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $200 per DALY averted and across the entire range of potential variable inputs.ConclusionsThe current economic analysis suggests the OTCS program to be a highly cost-effective intervention. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrates that the conclusions remain stable even when considering the joint uncertainty of the cost and DALY estimates.     

Costs, health effects and cost-effectiveness of alcohol and tobacco control strategies in Estonia

OBJECTIVE: To assess the population-level costs, effects and cost-effectiveness of different alcohol and tobacco control strategies in Estonia. DESIGN: A WHO cost-effectiveness modelling framework was used to estimate the total costs and effects of interventions. Costs were assessed in Estonian Kroon (EEK) for the year 2000, while effects were expressed in disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted. Regional cost-effectiveness estimates for Eastern Europe, were used as baseline and were contextualised by including country-specific input data. RESULTS: Increased excise taxes are the most cost-effective intervention to reduce both hazardous alcohol consumption and smoking: 759 EEK (euro 49) and 218 EEK (euro 14) per DALY averted, respectively. Imposing additional advertising bans would cost 1331 EEK (euro 85) per DALY averted to reduce hazardous alcohol consumption and 304 EEK (euro 19) to reduce smoking. Compared to WHO-CHOICE regional estimates, interventions were less costly and thereby more cost-effective in Estonia. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions in alcohol and tobacco control are cost-effective, and broad implementation of these interventions to upgrade current situation is warranted from the economic point of view. First priority is an increase in taxation, followed by advertising bans and other interventions. The differences between WHO-CHOICE regional cost-effectiveness estimates and contextualised results underline the importance of the country level analysis.