Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
1.
J Med Econ ; 26(1): 509-524, 2023.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2257092

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To assess the public health impact and economic value of booster vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, Bivalent in the United States. METHODS: A combined cohort Markov decision tree model estimated the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of booster vaccination compared to no booster vaccination in individuals aged ≥5 years. Analyses prospectively assessed three scenarios (base case, low, high) defined based upon the emergence (or not) of subvariants, using list prices. Age-stratified parameters were informed by literature. The cost-effectiveness analysis estimated cases, hospitalizations and deaths averted, Life Years (LYs) and Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) gained, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), the net monetary benefit (NMB), and the Return on Investment (ROI). The budget impact analyses used the perspective of a hypothetical 1-million-member plan. Sensitivity analyses explored parameter uncertainty. Conservatively, indirect effects and broad societal benefits were not considered. RESULTS: The base case predicted that, compared to no booster vaccination, the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, Bivalent could result in ∼3.7 million fewer symptomatic cases, 162 thousand fewer hospitalizations, 45 thousand fewer deaths, 373 thousand fewer discounted QALYs lost, and was cost-saving. Using a conservative value of $50,000 for 1 LY, every $1 invested yielded estimated $4.67 benefits. Unit costs, health outcomes and effectiveness had the greatest impact on results. At $50,000 per QALY gained, the booster generated a 34.2 billion NMB and probabilistic sensitivity analyses indicated a 92% chance of being cost-saving and 98% of being cost-effective. The bivalent was cost-saving or highly cost-effective in high and low scenarios. In a hypothetical 1-million-member health plan population, the vaccine was predicted to be a budget-efficient solution for payers. CONCLUSIONS: Booster vaccination with the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, Bivalent for the US population aged ≥5 years could generate notable public health impact and be cost-saving based on the findings of our base case analyses.


Asunto(s)
Vacuna BNT162 , COVID-19 , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Salud Pública , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunación/métodos
2.
J Public Health Manag Pract ; 28(6): 624-630, 2022.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2287696

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To estimate the costs to implement public health department (PHD)-run COVID-19 vaccination clinics. DESIGN: Retrospectively reported data on COVID-19 vaccination clinic characteristics and resources used during a high-demand day in March 2021. These resources were combined with national average wages, supply costs, and facility costs to estimate the operational cost and start-up cost of clinics. SETTING: Thirty-four PHD-run COVID-19 vaccination clinics across 8 states and 1 metropolitan statistical area. PARTICIPANTS: Clinic managers at 34 PHD-run COVID-19 vaccination clinics. INTERVENTION: Large-scale COVID-19 vaccination clinics were implemented by public health agencies as part of the pandemic response. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURED: Operational cost per day, operational cost per vaccination, start-up cost per clinic. RESULTS: Median operational cost per day for a clinic was $10 314 (range, $637-$95 163) and median cost per vaccination was $38 (range, $9-$206). There was a large range of operational costs across clinics. Clinics used an average of 99 total staff hours per 100 patients vaccinated. Median start-up cost per clinic was $15 348 (range, $1 409-$165 190). CONCLUSIONS: Results show that clinics require a large range of resources to meet the high throughput needs of the COVID-19 pandemic response. Estimating the costs of PHD-run vaccination clinics for the pandemic response is essential for ensuring that resources are available for clinic success. If clinics are not adequately supported, they may stop functioning, which would slow the pandemic response if no other setting or approach is possible.


Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunas contra la COVID-19/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Pandemias , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Vacunación
3.
Expert Rev Vaccines ; 22(1): 54-65, 2023.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2160669

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Limited data are available describing the global impact of COVID-19 vaccines. This study estimated the global public health and economic impact of COVID-19 vaccines before the emergence of the Omicron variant. METHODS: A static model covering 215 countries/territories compared the direct effects of COVID-19 vaccination to no vaccination during 13 December 2020-30 September 2021. After adjusting for underreporting of cases and deaths, base case analyses estimated total cases and deaths averted, and direct outpatient and productivity costs saved through averted health outcomes. Sensitivity analyses applied alternative model assumptions. RESULTS: COVID-19 vaccines prevented an estimated median (IQR) of 151.7 (133.7-226.1) million cases and 620.5 (411.1-698.1) thousand deaths globally through September 2021. In sensitivity analysis applying an alternative underreporting assumption, median deaths averted were 2.1 million. Estimated direct outpatient cost savings were $21.2 ($18.9-30.9) billion and indirect savings of avoided productivity loss were $135.1 ($121.1-206.4) billion, yielding a total cost savings of $155 billion globally through averted infections. CONCLUSIONS: Using a conservative modeling approach that considered direct effects only, we estimated that COVID-19 vaccines have averted millions of infections and deaths, generating billions of cost savings worldwide, which underscore the continued importance of vaccination in public health response to COVID-19.


Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Humanos , Salud Pública , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , COVID-19/epidemiología , COVID-19/prevención & control , SARS-CoV-2
4.
Vaccine ; 41(3): 750-755, 2023 01 16.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2150796

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Public health department (PHD) led COVID-19 vaccination clinics can be a critical component of pandemic response as they facilitate high volume of vaccination. However, few patient-time analyses examining patient throughput at mass vaccination clinics with unique COVID-19 vaccination challenges have been published. METHODS: During April and May of 2021, 521 patients in 23 COVID-19 vaccination sites counties of 6 states were followed to measure the time spent from entry to vaccination. The total time was summarized and tabulated by clinic characteristics. A multivariate linear regression analysis was conducted to evaluate the association between vaccination clinic settings and patient waiting times in the clinic. RESULTS: The average time a patient spent in the clinic from entry to vaccination was 9 min 5 s (range: 02:00-23:39). Longer patient flow times were observed in clinics with higher numbers of doses administered, 6 or fewer vaccinators, walk-in patients accepted, dedicated services for people with disabilities, and drive-through clinics. The multivariate linear regression showed that longer patient waiting times were significantly associated with the number of vaccine doses administered, dedicated services for people with disabilities, the availability of more than one brand of vaccine, and rurality. CONCLUSIONS: Given the standardized procedures outlined by immunization guidelines, reducing the wait time is critical in lowering the patient flow time by relieving the bottleneck effect in the clinic. Our study suggests enhancing the efficiency of PHD-led vaccination clinics by preparing vaccinators to provide vaccines with proper and timely support such as training or delivering necessary supplies and paperwork to the vaccinators. In addition, patient wait time can be spent answering questions about vaccination or reviewing educational materials on other public health services.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Vacunas , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19/prevención & control , Vacunación , Vacunación Masiva
5.
Hum Vaccin Immunother ; 17(11): 3871-3875, 2021 11 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1455122

RESUMEN

In early 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak a global pandemic. In response, two novel messenger RNA (mRNA)-based vaccines: mRNA-1273 (Moderna) and BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) were rapidly developed. A thorough understanding of the differences in workflow requirements between the two vaccines may lead to improved efficiencies and reduced economic burden, both of which are crucial for streamlining vaccine deployment and minimizing wastage. Vaccine administration workflow costs are borne by providers and reimbursed separately from dose acquisition in the United States. Currently, mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2 are the most administered COVID-19 vaccines in the United States. In this study, US-licensed and practicing pharmacists were interviewed to collect data on differences in terms of labor costs associated with the workflows for mRNA-1273 and BNT162b2. Results suggest the cost differential for mRNA-1273 compared to BNT162b2 is -$0.82 (or -$1.01 when assuming volume equivalency). If extrapolated to even just a proportion of the remaining unvaccinated US population, this can amount to significant workflow efficiencies and lower vaccine administration costs. Further, as key differences in the vaccine workflow steps between the two vaccines would be similar in other settings/regions, these findings are likely transferable to health-care systems worldwide.


Asunto(s)
Vacunas contra la COVID-19 , COVID-19 , Vacuna nCoV-2019 mRNA-1273 , Vacuna BNT162 , Humanos , ARN Mensajero/genética , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos , Vacunas Sintéticas , Vacunas de ARNm
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA