ABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic had a severe global impact. A range of campaigns and activities, including vaccines, are being implemented to counteract this pandemic. Using observational data, the goal of this scoping review is to identify adverse events connected with COVID-19 vaccinations. We conduct a scoping study and searched three databases from the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 through June 2022. Based on our criteria and searched keywords, the review included eleven papers in total, with the majority of the studies being conducted in developed countries. The study populations varied and included general community populations, healthcare professionals, military forces, and patients with systemic lupus and cancer. This study includes vaccines from Pfizer-BioNTech, Oxford-AstraZeneca, Sinopharm, and Moderna. The COVID-19 vaccine-related adverse events were classified into three types: local side effects, systemic side effects, and other side effects such as allergies. The adverse reactions to COVID-19 vaccines are mild to moderate in severity, with no significant influence or interference in individual daily activities and no unique patterns in cause of death among vaccine-related deaths. According to the findings of these investigations, the COVID-19 vaccine is safe to administer and induces protection. It is vital to convey accurate information to the public about vaccination side effects, potential adverse responses, and the safety level of the vaccines supplied. Multiple strategies must be implemented at the individual, organizational, and population levels to eliminate vaccine hesitance. Future studies could investigate the vaccine's effect on people of various ages and medical conditions.
ABSTRACT
Background: WHO reported that 5.5 million people died in the world because of COVID-19. One of the efforts to mitigate the pandemic is administrating the vaccines globally. Objective: The objective of this study was to review cost-effectiveness analysis of COVID-19 vaccination in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: We searched PubMed and EBSCO for the eligible studies with inclusion criteria using cost-effectiveness analysis, free full text, low-middle-income countries, and the publication date since the last year. Four reviewers conducted the review independently. Results: The review identified four articles meeting the eligibility criteria. The settings were LMICs. Different perspectives and economic modelling used by the countries confirmed a similar result. They all explained that vaccination could prevent the infection spread and mortality caused by COVID-19 and showed high cost-effectiveness values. Conclusion: Administering COVID-19 vaccines was cost-effective and even cost-saving. The studies found that vaccination was more cost-effective in reducing the spread of the COVID-19 virus and the mortality it caused than no vaccination.
ABSTRACT
Background: Safe and effective vaccination is considered to be the most critical strategy to fight coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), leading to individual and herd immunity protection. We aimed to systematically review the economic evaluation of COVID-19 vaccination globally. Methods: We performed a systematic search to identify relevant studies in two major databases (MEDLINE/PubMed and EBSCO) published until September 8, 2022. After deduplication, two researchers independently screened the study titles and abstracts according to pre-determined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The remaining full-text studies were assessed for eligibility. We assessed their quality of reporting using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 checklist and summarized and narratively presented the results. Results: We identified 25 studies that assessed the economic evaluation of COVID-19 vaccination worldwide by considering several input parameters, including vaccine cost, vaccine efficacy, utility value, and the size of the targeted population. All studies suggested that COVID-19 vaccination was a cost-effective or cost-saving intervention for mitigating coronavirus transmission and its effect in many countries within certain conditions. Most studies reported vaccine efficacy values ranging from 65% to 75%. Conclusions: Given the favorable cost-effectiveness profile of COVID-19 vaccines and disparities in affordability across countries, considering prioritization has become paramount. This review provides comprehensive insights into the economic evaluation of COVID-19 vaccination that will be useful to policymakers, particularly in highlighting preventive measures and preparedness plans for the next possible pandemic.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , COVID-19 , Humans , Cost-Benefit Analysis , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Vaccination , Quality-Adjusted Life YearsABSTRACT
Background WHO reported that 5.5 million people died in the world because of COVID-19. One of the efforts to mitigate the pandemic is administrating the vaccines globally. Objective The objective of this study was to review cost-effectiveness analysis of COVID-19 vaccination in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods We searched PubMed and EBSCO for the eligible studies with inclusion criteria using cost-effectiveness analysis, free full text, low-middle-income countries, and the publication date since the last year. Four reviewers conducted the review independently. Results The review identified four articles meeting the eligibility criteria. The settings were LMICs. Different perspectives and economic modelling used by the countries confirmed a similar result. They all explained that vaccination could prevent the infection spread and mortality caused by COVID-19 and showed high cost-effectiveness values. Conclusion Administering COVID-19 vaccines was cost-effective and even cost-saving. The studies found that vaccination was more cost-effective in reducing the spread of the COVID-19 virus and the mortality it caused than no vaccination.
ABSTRACT
The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has brought the need for regional collaboration on disease prevention and control to the fore. The review by Durrance-Bagale et al offers insights on the enablers, barriers and lessons learned from the experience of various regional initiatives. Translating these lessons into action, however, remains a challenge. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) planned to establish a regional centre for disease control; however, many factors have slowed the realisation of these efforts. Going forward, regional initiatives should be able to address the complexity of emerging infectious diseases through a One Health approach, assess the social and economic impact of diseases on the region and study the real-world effectiveness of regional collaborations. The initiatives should seek to be inclusive of stakeholders including those from the private sector and should identify innovative measures for financing. This advancement will enable regions such as ASEAN to effectively prepare for the next pandemic.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Vaccination is known to have an enormous impact on improving child health. In Indonesia, the government has included several vaccines in the national immunization program. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate parents' knowledge, attitude, and practice on childhood immunization during the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia. METHODS: A valid and reliable questionnaire was delivered to approximately 276 parents in Jakarta and Bandung, representing the epicenter of the pandemic. This study was conducted from June 2020 to February 2021. The correlations between parents' knowledge, attitudes, and practice with the characteristics of the respondents were investigated. In addition, multiple regression analysis was performed to identify the variables associated with good vaccination practice. RESULTS: The results showed that the mean scores of parents' knowledge, attitude, and practice on childhood vaccinations were 7.22 (± 1.30) out of 9 points, 3.93 (± 0.31) out of 4 points, and 3.59 (± 0.97) out of 5 points, respectively. Respondents graduated from university were more knowledgeable than those graduated from senior high school (p-value <0.05). Employed participants had better scores in knowledge and practice, compared to unemployed participants (p-value <0.05). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, this study found positive correlations between participants' knowledge and attitude, knowledge and practice, and attitude and practice on childhood vaccination during the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia.
ABSTRACT
The current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) situation might deteriorate the efforts to eliminate tuberculosis (TB) in Indonesia. This study aimed to review the COVID-19 pandemic disruption on the management of TB treatment in Indonesia. We identified several disruptions due to the pandemic on TB control management. Firstly, there is a potential decrease in the funding for TB treatment. Financial disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic have led to further setbacks. In many countries, including Indonesia, financial and other resources have been reallocated from TB to the COVID-19 response. Secondly, it has been highlighted that all TB services, including case detection and rapid diagnostic, have been disrupted by the pandemic. Thirdly, the pandemic would be associated with the lower quality of care and treatment for TB in Indonesia. It might decrease the enthusiasm of patients with TB, multi-drug resistant (MDR)-TB, and TB-human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) to visit TB hospitals because of social distancing measures by the government. Finally, the COVID-19 pandemic also has impacted critical activities of monitoring, evaluation, and surveillance. There are several lessons from other countries about managing TB treatment during the pandemic, such as combining screening for COVID-19 and TB by applying x-ray technology and artificial intelligence-based software. In addition, the use of telemedicine or telehealth in TB treatment is also beneficial to deliver medication, assess patients' progress, and inform prevention strategies. To reach the target with the end TB strategy, the government of Indonesia can adopt the World Health Organization's (WHO's) comprehensive strategies, such as integrated, patient-centered TB care and prevention strategies; bold policies and supportive systems; and intensified research and innovations.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: As one of the strategies to mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic, social distancing (SD) measures are recommended to control disease spread and reduce the attack rate. Therefore, this study aims to estimate the costs and effects of SD measures through school closures, workforce, and community contact reductions for mitigating the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia. METHODS: Two mitigation scenarios of SD for 1 month and continuous SD were compared with the baseline (no intervention). A modified Susceptible-Exposed-Infected-Recovered (SEIR) compartmental model accounting for disease spread during the latent period was applied by considering a 1-year time horizon. The costs of healthcare, school closures, and productivity loss due to disease as well as intervention were considered to estimate the total pandemic cost among all scenarios. RESULTS: In a comparison with the baseline, the result showed that total savings in scenarios of SD for 1 month and continuous SD was approximately $415 billion and $699 billion, respectively, while the averted deaths were 4.6 million and 8.5 million, respectively. Sensitivity analysis showed that basic reproduction number, infectious period, daily wage, incubation period, daily ICU admission cost, and case fatality rate were the most influential parameters affecting the savings and the number of averted deaths. CONCLUSIONS: SD measures through school closures, workforce, and community contact reductions were concluded to be cost-saving. Increasing the duration of social distancing tends to increase both the savings and the number of averted deaths.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemics , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Epidemiological Models , Humans , Indonesia/epidemiology , Physical Distancing , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
As a part of mitigation strategies during a COVID-19 pandemic, the WHO currently recommends social distancing measures through school closures (SC) and work closures (WC) to control the infection spread and reduce the illness attack rate. Focusing on the use of administrative and secondary data, this study aimed to estimate the costs and effects of alternative strategies for mitigating the COVID-19 pandemic in Jakarta, Indonesia, by comparing the baseline (no intervention) with SC + WC for 2, 4, and 8 weeks as respective scenarios. A modified Susceptible-Exposed-Infected-Recovered (SEIR) compartmental model accounting for the spread of infection during the latent period was applied by taking into account a 1-year time horizon. To estimate the total pandemic cost of all scenarios, we took into account the cost of healthcare, SC, and productivity loss due to WC and illness. Next to costs, averted deaths were considered as the effect measure. In comparison with the baseline, the result showed that total savings in scenarios of SC + WC for 2, 4, and 8 weeks would be approximately $24 billion, $25 billion, and $34 billion, respectively. In addition, increasing the duration of SC and WC would increase the number of averted deaths. Scenarios of SC + WC for 2, 4, and 8 weeks would result in approximately 159,075, 173,963, and 250,842 averted deaths, respectively. A sensitivity analysis showed that the wage per day, infectious period, basic reproduction number, incubation period, and case fatality rate were found to be the most influential parameters affecting the savings and number of averted deaths. It can be concluded that all the mitigation scenarios were considered to be cost-saving, and increasing the duration of SC and WC would increase both the savings and the number of averted deaths.