Cost of Delivering Tetanus Toxoid and Tetanus-Diphtheria Vaccination in Vietnam and the Budget Impact of Proposed Changes to the Schedule.

INTRODUCTION: In 2017, aligned with global World Health Organization tetanus guidelines, Vietnam prepared evidence to support a recommendation to introduce the tetanus-diphtheria (Td) vaccine into routine immunization. This study aimed to provide evidence on the costs and budgetary impact of the potential replacement of the tetanus-toxoid (TT) vaccine with the Td vaccine, considering different possible delivery strategies. METHOD: We used an activity-based ingredients costing approach to estimate the 2017 program costs of providing TT vaccination to girls aged 15-16 years and conducting Td campaigns in outbreak areas. We performed a budget impact analysis for 2018-2025 using the cost per dose estimates based on the current delivery of these vaccines. We assumed complete cessation of TT vaccination of girls aged 15-16 years and a transition period where Td outbreak control campaigns would still occur. Td vaccine was assumed to be provided to children aged 7 years using either facility- or school-based delivery or combined facility- and school-based delivery. RESULTS: The delivery cost per dose for current TT vaccination for girls aged 15-16 years was US$1.49 for school-based delivery, US$1.76 for facility-based delivery, and US$3.86 for delivery via outreach. Td vaccination through campaigns was estimated to cost US$3.56/dose. During 2018-2025, replacing the TT vaccine for girls aged 15-16 years with the Td vaccine for children aged 7 years is estimated to save US$4.61 million in immunization delivery costs if a school-based delivery strategy is used or US$1.04 million if facility-based delivery is used. CONCLUSION: Compared to the current plan, delivery of Td routine vaccination via a school-based strategy was the most cost saving. These results were used in late 2019 to support the delivery of Td vaccination using a school-based delivery strategy for children aged 7 years in 30 Northern provinces in Vietnam.

Key Factors Influencing Use of Immunization Cost Evidence in Country Planning and Budgeting Processes: Experiences From Indonesia, Tanzania, and Vietnam.

In many low- and middle-income countries, planning cycles and policy decisions are not always informed by cost evidence, even where relevant and recent cost evidence is available. The Immunization Costing Action Network (ICAN) project was a research and learning community designed to strengthen country capacity to generate immunization cost evidence and to understand and improve the evidence-to-policy linkages for the evidence. We identified key factors that increase the likelihood that health policy makers will use evidence for policy making or planning, which shaped the development of a 6-step evidence to policy and practice (EPP) facilitated process. ICAN used the EPP process in Indonesia, Tanzania, and Vietnam from 2016-2019. The experience resulted in several insights regarding country priorities related to cost evidence and factors that determine uptake. Cost evidence is more likely to be used if it answers a specific policy question prioritized by the immunization program, while the use case is less clear and urgent for routine planning and program management. Nonhealth ministries and subnational stakeholders can provide important perspectives to inform the research and its usability. The use case for evidence should be revisited periodically as divergences from formal planning cycles are common and new policy windows open. Ensuring evidence is available at the right time is critical, even if this requires a sacrifice between rigor and speed. Engaging a small group of stakeholders, rather than an individual, to champion the research may be more effective, and the research has greater legitimacy if it is produced by multidisciplinary country teams. Evidence and messages should be tailored for and packaged targeting different audiences. Going forward, continued support is necessary to bridge the divide between those who generate cost evidence and those who translate evidence for policy and planning decisions.

Immunization costs, from evidence to policy: Findings from a nationally representative costing study and policy translation effort in Tanzania.

INTRODUCTION: Information on the costs of routine immunization programs is needed for budgeting, planning, and domestic resource mobilization. This information is particularly important for countries such as Tanzania that are preparing to transition out of support from Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. This study aimed to estimate the total and unit costs for of child immunization in Tanzania from July 2016 to June 2017 and make this evidence available to key stakeholders. METHODS: We used an ingredients-based approach to collect routine immunization cost data from the facility, district, regional, and national levels. We collected data on the cost of vaccines as well as non-vaccine delivery costs. We estimated total and unit costs from a provider perspective for each level and overall, and examined how costs varied by delivery strategy, geographic area, and facility-level service delivery volume. An evidence-to-policy plan identified key opportunities and stakeholders to target to facilitate the use of results. RESULTS: The total annual economic cost of the immunization program, inclusive of vaccines, was estimated to be US$138 million (95% CI: 133, 144), or $4.32 ($3.72, $4.98) per dose. The delivery costs made up $45 million (38, 52), or $1.38 (1.06, 1.70) per dose. The costs of facility-based delivery were similar in urban and rural areas, but the costs of outreach delivery were higher in rural areas than in urban areas. The facility-level delivery cost per dose decreased with the facility service delivery volume. DISCUSSION: We estimated the costs of the routine immunization program in Tanzania, where no immunization costing study had been conducted for five years. These estimates can inform the program's budgeting and planning as Tanzania prepares to transition out of Gavi support. Next steps for evidence-to-policy translation have been identified, including technical support requirements for policy advocacy and planning.

Reporting gaps in immunization costing studies: Recommendations for improving the practice.

High-quality evidence on the cost of delivering vaccines is essential for policymakers, planners, and donors to ensure sufficient, equitable, predictable, and sustainable financing. However, poor practices and reporting oversights in both the published and grey literature limit the understanding and usability of cost data. This paper describes quality assessment results and quantifies problems with immunization costing study reporting practices found in 68 articles and reports included in an immunization delivery unit cost repository focused on low- and middle-income countries and launched in 2018, the Immunization Delivery Cost Catalogue (IDCC). We recommend a standard of practice for writing up an immunization costing study, in the form of an easy to follow checklist, to increase the quality of reporting and the comparability of results. Reporting that adheres to this checklist will improve the comprehension and interpretability of evidence, increasing the likelihood that costing studies are understood and can be used for resource mobilization and allocation, planning and budgeting, and policy decisions.

The costs of delivering vaccines in low- and middle-income countries: Findings from a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Information on immunization delivery costs (IDCs) is essential for better planning and budgeting for the sustainability and performance of national programs. However, delivery cost evidence is fragmented and of variable quality, making it difficult for policymakers, planners, and other stakeholders to understand and use. This study aimed to consolidate and summarize the evidence on delivery costs, answering the question: What are the unit costs of vaccine delivery across low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and through a variety of delivery strategies? METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of over 15,000 published and unpublished resources from 2005 to 2018 that included IDCs in LMICs. We quality-rated and extracted data from 61 resources that contained 410 immunization delivery unit costs (e.g., cost per dose, cost per fully immunized child). We converted cost findings to a common year (2016) and currency (U.S. dollars) to ensure comparability across studies and settings. We performed a descriptive and gap analysis and developed immunization delivery cost ranges using comparable unit costs for single vaccines and schedules of vaccines. RESULTS: The majority of IDC evidence comes from low-income countries and Sub-Saharan Africa. Most unit costs are presented as cost per dose and represent health facility-based delivery. DISCUSSION: The cost ranges may be higher than current estimates used in many LMICs for budgeting: $0.16-$2.54 incremental cost per dose (including economic, financial, and fiscal costs) for single, newly introduced vaccines, and $0.75-$9.45 full cost per dose (economic costs) for schedules of four to eight vaccines delivered to children under one. CONCLUSIONS: Despite increased attention on improving coverage and strengthening immunization delivery, evidence on the cost of delivery is nascent but growing. The cost ranges can inform planning and policymaking, but should be used with caution given their width and the few unit costs used in their development.

Costing of commune health station visits for provider payment reform in Vietnam.

Expanding effective coverage in Vietnam will require better use of available resources and placing higher priority on primary care. The way providers are currently paid does not give priority to primary care and does not reflect the costs of delivering services. This paper aims to estimate the unit costs of primary care visits at commune health stations (CHS) in selected areas in Vietnam. Seventy-six CHS from two provinces in northern Vietnam were studied. Costs were calculated from the perspective of the CHS using the top-down costing using the step-down cost accounting technique in order to estimate the full cost of delivering services. On average, the cost of one outpatient visit in mountainous, rural and urban CHSs was VND 49,521 (US$2.40), VND 41,375 (US$2.01) and VND 39,794 (US$1.93), respectively. Personnel costs accounted for the highest share of total costs followed by medicines. The share of operating costs was minimal. On average, CHSs recover 18.9% of their total cost for an outpatient visit from social insurance payments or fees that can be charged patients. The results provide valuable information for policy-makers as they revise the provider payment methods to better reflect the costs of services and give greater priority to primary care.