Literature DB >> 25420713

Cost-effectiveness analysis of quadrivalent influenza vaccine versus trivalent influenza vaccine for elderly in Hong Kong.

Joyce H S You, Wai-kit Ming, Paul K S Chan.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cost and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained by quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV) versus trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) in Hong Kong elderly were estimated over 9 seasons.
METHODS: TIV-unmatched influenza B infection rates with QIV versus TIV were estimated by an epidemiology model. Model parameters included percentages of influenza B lineages in circulation, influenza B-associated hospital admission, age-specific population, vaccine coverage and effectiveness. Incremental cost per QALY gained (ICER) by QIV versus TIV were estimated from Hong Kong's societal perspective.
RESULTS: Mean reduction in influenza B infection rate was 191.3 (95%CI 45.1-337.5) per 100,000 population aged ≥65 years. Highest cost savings and QALYs gained by QIV occurred in 2007 with high percentage of TIV-unmatched strain (92.9%) for age groups 65-79 years (USD266,473 and 22.8 QALYs) and ≥80 years (USD483,461 and 27.3 QALYs). ICERs of QIV were below willingness-to-pay for age group 65-79 years in 6, 5 and 3 years when QIV cost + USD1 + USD2 and + USD5 more than TIV, respectively. For age group ≥80 years, ICERs of QIV were below willingness-to-pay in 7 and 5 years when QIV cost + USD1 and + USD5, correspondingly.
CONCLUSIONS: Acceptance of QIV to be cost-effective in Hong Kong elderly was subject to QIV unit cost and percentage of circulating TIV-unmatched influenza B lineages.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25420713      PMCID: PMC4246550          DOI: 10.1186/s12879-014-0618-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMC Infect Dis        ISSN: 1471-2334            Impact factor:   3.090


Background

We recently reported the percentages of influenza B lineages (B/Victoria and B/Yamagata) in clinical isolates in 2000–2010 and found that co-circulation of both influenza B lineages was very common in Hong Kong [1]. Furthermore, one of the influenza B lineages predominated (accounting for over 80% of the circulating influenza B strains) in six of the ten years. These predominated years were associated with increased risk of hospitalization by 1.4-fold. The seasonal trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) covers two subtypes of influenza A (A/H1N1 and A/H3N2) plus one of the two influenza B lineages circulating in humans, and TIV only matched the predominated influenza B strain in two of these six predominated years. Findings in literature suggested that including two lineages of influenza B in a quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV) would have a positive impact in terms of cost saving and reducing hospitalization related to influenza infection [2],[3]. To further quantify the clinical and economic impact of QIV, we estimated the difference in costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained by QIV, when compared to TIV, in elderly population over the period of 2001–2010 from a societal perspective of Hong Kong.

Methods

In the present analysis, we estimated the potential cost and QALYs difference of influenza B, when compared to TIV, from 2001–2010 years in elderly population (aged ≥65 years) in Hong Kong. Year 2009 was excluded as it was dominated by the novel pandemic influenza A 2009 H1N1. Events caused by infection of the TIV-unmatched influenza B lineage in each year were calculated by an epidemiology model. The infections caused by the influenza B lineage or influenza A subtypes covered by both TIV and QIV were excluded, assuming that there were no change in the infection rates. The costs and QALYs loss for symptomatic patients who received medical care in outpatient and hospital setting were estimated from the event rates. The parameters used for estimation of clinical events, cost difference and QALYs gained by QIV versus TIV were listed in Table 1. All model parameters were obtained from published literature.
Table 1

Parameters for calculation of event rates, costs and QALYs with QIV versus TIV

ParameterValuesReferences
Clinical inputs
  Influenza vaccine coverage (≥65 years)39.1%15
  TIV vaccine effectiveness against influenza B (2001–2010)0.45-0.757-14
  Reduction in TIV influenza B vaccine effectiveness against TIV-unmatched influenza B lineage30%6
  Influenza B hospitalization rate (2001–2010) by age group (per 100,000):1
  65-79 years1-40.8
  ≥ 80 years0-222.1
  Hong Kong population (2001−2010) by age group:24
  65-79 years600,986-665,642
  ≥ 80 years146,066-257,966
  Influenza B lineage in circulation (2001−2010)1
  Yamagata5.3%-96.3%
  Victoria3.7-94.7%
  Case-fatality ratio0.05%5
  Percent of inpatient cases with ICU admission:2.4%4
  Mortality rate of influenza B in ≥65 years inpatient cases5.9%1
Utility
  Utility score for >65 years0.8425
  Utility loss16-22
  Outpatient care0.40
  Hospitalization without ICU care0.50
  Hospitalization with ICU care0.62
  Life expectancy in Hong Kong (years)8324
Cost (USD)*
  Cost of outpatient clinic (per visit)4926
  Number of clinic visit for patients without hospitalization1Assumption
  Cost of hospitalization without ICU care (per day)60026
  Cost of hospitalization with ICU care (per day)2,94926
  Length of illness (days)
  Outpatient care723
  Hospitalization (length of stay)10.84
  Caregiver salary per day4724
  Labor force rate68%24
  Unemployment rate3.7%24

*1 USD =7.8 HKD.

Parameters for calculation of event rates, costs and QALYs with QIV versus TIV *1 USD =7.8 HKD.

Clinical events analysis

For each year, the hospitalization rate of target B lineage was calculated using the influenza B hospital admission rate and the percentage of target influenza B lineage identified in the isolates reported in our previous cohort study [1]. Briefly, in this prior study we identified hospitalized patients with laboratory confirmed influenza virus A or B infection and the circulation pattern of influenza B lineage in the Prince of Wales Hospital (a 1300-bed Hong Kong teaching hospital), and calculated age-stratified population-based hospitalization rates of influenza A and B for years from 2000–2010 (excluding 2009 for the same reason above). The intensive care unit (ICU) admission rate was calculated by hospitalization rate of target lineage together with ICU admission rate among hospitalized patients [4]. The mortality rate of influenza B among hospitalized patients was retrieved from patients aged ≥65 years in the same cohort of our previous study [1]. The expected annual infection rate of target lineage was estimated using the mortality rate and a case-fatality ratio of influenza [5]. The rate of outpatient care was further calculated as the difference of estimated annual infection rate and hospitalization rate. To estimate the reduction in event rates of outpatient care, hospitalization, ICU admission and death with the use of QIV versus TIV, the epidemiology model described by Reed et al. was adoped [2]: Expected event rate without influenza vaccination = Event rate with TIV/(1 − (VC × VETIV)) Expected event rate with QIV = expected event rate without influenza vaccination × (1× (VC × VEQIV)) where VC and VE were the vaccine coverage and vaccine effectiveness against the TIV-unmatched lineage, respectively. Reduction in event rate = Event rate with TIV − expected event rate with QIV. The VETIV against the TIV-unmatched influenza B lineage was estimated to be reduced by 30% [6]. The VEQIV against the TIV-unmatched influenza B lineage was assumed to be the same as VE of TIV against the TIV-selected influenza B lineage, and the year-specific VE was retrieved from literature reported in the period of 2001–2010 [7]-[14]. The year 2012 age-specific influenza vaccine coverage rate (39.1%) in elderly published by the Department of Health of Hong Kong was applied in the present analysis for 9 seasons [15]. The reduction in case numbers of each event (outpatient care, hospitalization, ICU admission and death) were then calculated by multiplying the change in event rate and the population of ≥65 years for each year.

QALY analysis

The QALYs gained by QIV were calculated using the number of reduced infected cases, and the utility value and duration of time-spent in each of the four statuses: (1) Outpatient care, (2) hospitalization without ICU admission, (3) ICU care, and (4) death. The utilities were retrieved from health-related quality of life reported from literature (Table 1) [16]-[22]. The time-spent in outpatient care and hospitalization were the length of outpatient duration of illness [23] and length of hospital stay [4], correspondingly. The QALYs loss of death was estimated using life expectancy in Hong Kong and age-specific utility value for ≥65 years [24],[25]. The QALYs loss in both vaccine arms was discounted to 2014 with 3% annual discounted rate.

Cost analysis

Both direct medical cost and indirect cost of reduced cases of the TIV-unmatched influenza B lineage were considered as cost savings of QIV, from the societal perspective of Hong Kong. Direct medical cost included costs of outpatient care and hospitalization. The cost per outpatient clinic visit and cost per hospital day (with and without ICU care) were estimated from the 2014 charges of the Hospital Authority (HA). HA is the largest, non-profit-making public health organization in Hong Kong. Assuming the charges listed by the Hospital Authority represent only the cost components (including labor costs) with no addition of profits, the cost per general outpatient visit and daily cost of hospitalization were therefore approximated using the Hospital Authority charges [26]. Productivity loss of caregivers of elderly patients was estimated by the median daily income (non-gender specific) of the population in Hong Kong [24], and duration of hospitalization for inpatient care. For patients receiving only outpatient care, the duration of productivity loss was limited to days attending outpatient clinic. The number of clinic visit was assumed to be one time for a conservative estimation on both direct and indirect costs of outpatient care. The proportion of employed caregivers was estimated by the percentage of Hong Kong population in the labor force and the employment rate among the labor force [24].

Cost-effectiveness analysis

The incremental cost per QALY gained (ICER) by QIV versus TIV was calculated using the following equation: (Additional vaccine cost of QIV versus TIV – Cost-savings of QIV)/QALYs gained by reduced events, where additional vaccine cost of QIV was calculated by: Additional unit cost of QIV versus TIV × age-specific coverage rate × population of age group The current unit cost of TIV in Hong Kong is USD7.7. Four levels of additional cost (the unit cost of QIV to be USD1, 2, 5 and 10 more than TIV) were considered in the cost-effectiveness analysis. As recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO), three-fold of gross domestic product (GDP) per capita was used as the threshold of willingness-to-pay per QALY [27]. A scenario with ICER of QIV less than 3-fold of GDP per capita of Hong Kong was considered as cost-effective.

Results

The reduction in expected events rates of TIV-unmatched influenza B by QIV versus TIV are shown in Table 2. The mean reduction in influenza infection rate for elderly aged ≥65 years was 191.3 (95%CI 45.1-337.5) per 100,000 in 2001–2010. Age-specific reduction in the age group 65–79 years was 104.8 (95%CI 27.2-182.4) per 100,000, and 451.4 (95%CI 87.7-815.1) per 100,000 in population aged ≥80 years.
Table 2

Reduction in expected event rates of TIV-unmatched influenza B by QIV versus TIV in Hong Kong elderly

YearRate reduction (per 100,000)
Symptomatic influenzaOutpatientHospitalizationDead
Age 65–79 years
20012.68092.65820.02270.0013
2002*0.00000.00000.00000.0000
20033.79333.76110.03210.0019
2004282.0652279.67482.39040.1410
200584.469783.75380.71580.0422
200627.580927.34720.23370.0138
2007282.9799280.58182.39810.1415
2008201.6311199.92231.70870.1008
201058.188957.69580.49310.0291
Age ≥80 years
20011.94491.92850.01650.0010
2002*0.00000.00000.00000.0000
200342.105541.74870.35680.0211
2004838.6402831.53317.10710.4193
2005204.2730202.54191.73110.1021
200649.780249.35830.42190.0249
20071540.43731527.382813.05460.7702
20081032.56021023.80978.75050.5163
2010352.9492349.95812.99110.1765

*In 2002, no influenza B virus was identified from patients admitted to the Prince of Wale Hospital for age groups 65–79 years and ≥80 years. The expected reductions in event rates were considered as zero.

Reduction in expected event rates of TIV-unmatched influenza B by QIV versus TIV in Hong Kong elderly *In 2002, no influenza B virus was identified from patients admitted to the Prince of Wale Hospital for age groups 65–79 years and ≥80 years. The expected reductions in event rates were considered as zero. The highest total cost savings and QALYs gained by QIV in age group 65–79 years occurred in year 2007 (USD266,473 and 22.8 QALYs), followed by year 2004 (USD256,127 and 21.9 QALYs), and year 2008 (USD191,105 and 16.4 QALYs) (Table 3). Similarly, QIV had the highest cost-saving and QALYs gained from reduced cases of influenza B in age group ≥80 years in 2007 (USD483,461 and 27.3 QALYs), year 2008 (USD344,103 and 19.5 QALYs) and year 2004 (USD218,829 and 12.4 QALYs). In the year 2002, no influenza B virus was identified in hospital admissions at the Prince of Wales Hospital for age groups 65–79 years and ≥80 years. The expected reductions in infection, cost-saving and additional QALYs gained by QIV were considered to be zero in 2002.
Table 3

QALY gained and cost savings of QIV versus TIV

YearQALYsDirect costIndirect costTotal cost
Age 65–79 years
20010.1991,7815432,324
2002*0000
20030.2912,6007923,392
200421.940196,31159,816256,127
20056.67059,67918,18477,863
20062.21019,7776,02625,803
200722.826204,24162,232266,473
200816.370146,47444,631191,105
20104.78542,81813,04755,864
Age ≥80 years
20010.02331496410
2002*0000
20030.5817,8802,40110,281
200412.372167,72351,105218,829
20053.20743,47713,24756,724
20060.82911,2343,42314,657
200727.335370,553112,907483,461
200819.455263,74180,362344,103
20107.425100,65130,668131,319

*In 2002, no influenza B virus was identified from patients admitted to the Prince of Wale Hospital for age groups 65–79 years and ≥80 years. The expected reductions in infected cases, cost-saving and additional QALYs gained with QIV were considered as zero.

QALY gained and cost savings of QIV versus TIV *In 2002, no influenza B virus was identified from patients admitted to the Prince of Wale Hospital for age groups 65–79 years and ≥80 years. The expected reductions in infected cases, cost-saving and additional QALYs gained with QIV were considered as zero. The GDP per capita of Hong Kong was USD36,557.32 Using 3-time GDP per capita (USD109,671) as the threshold of willingness-to-pay, ICERs of QIV indicated that it was more cost-effective than TIV for age group 65–79 years in 6 years when QIV cost USD1 more than TIV (Table 4). When QIV was more costly than TIV by USD2, USD5 and USD10, it was more cost-effective than TIV in 5, 3 and 2 years, respectively. In the age group ≥80 years, the ICERs of QIV was below the threshold of willingness-to-pay in 7 years when QIV versus TIV cost level was + USD1. QIV remained to be cost-effective in 5 years when it cost up to USD5 more than TIV. It was cost-effective in 3 years when it cost USD10 more than TIV.
Table 4

ICER of QIV versus TIV

YearICER
Age (years)65-79≥80
Additional cost of QIV = USD$1
20011,168,8352,447,575
2002NE*NE*
2003822,641 96,189
2004 −454 −11,969
2005 25,793 5,786
2006 103,072 78,633
2007 −490 −14,574
2008 4,022 −13,043
2010 42,714 −4,102
Additional cost of QIV = USD$2
20012,349,3454,912,836
2002NE*NE*
20031,656,956210,065
2004 10,766 −6,252
2005 63,259 29,258
2006217,818174,952
2007 10,694 −11,461
2008 19,718 −8,400
2010 97,103 9,483
Additional cost of QIV = USD$5
20015,890,87412,308,620
2002NE*NE*
20034,159,902551,693
2004 44,426 10,900
2005175,659 99,676
2006562,056463,911
2007 44,245 −2,124
2008 66,806 5,531
2010260,268 50,238
Additional cost of QIV = USD$10
200111,793,42224,634,926
2002NE*NE*
20038,331,4781,121,073
2004 100,527 39,487
2005362,993217,039
20061,135,786945,509
2007 100,164 13,440
2008145,286 28,749
2010532,209118,163

# ICER = incremental cost per QALY saved by QIV. Using the threshold of 3-time gross domestic product per capita in Hong Kong as the willingness-to-pay per QALY, QIV was cost-effective with ICER USD109,671 or less (bold). A negative value of ICER indicated that QIV was less costly than TIV and gained higher QALYs.

*NE = Not effective. ICER was not calculated in 2002 because the expected reduction in infection and expected QALY gained were zero.

ICER of QIV versus TIV # ICER = incremental cost per QALY saved by QIV. Using the threshold of 3-time gross domestic product per capita in Hong Kong as the willingness-to-pay per QALY, QIV was cost-effective with ICER USD109,671 or less (bold). A negative value of ICER indicated that QIV was less costly than TIV and gained higher QALYs. *NE = Not effective. ICER was not calculated in 2002 because the expected reduction in infection and expected QALY gained were zero.

Discussion

The present analysis quantified the expected reduction in TIV-unmatched influenza B infection rate, direct medical cost and indirect cost of productivity loss, and QALYs loss if QIV was available in Hong Kong during 2001–2010. The symptomatic infection rates were reduced by 191.3 (95%CI 45.1-337.5) per 100,000 elderly aged ≥65 years in the 2001–2010, comparable to the estimated reduction in the US reported by Reed et al. (ranged from 1-440 per 100,000 in 2001–2008) [2]. As demonstrated by the annual cost savings and QALYs loss averted by QIV (Table 2), and QIV would be more cost-effective than TIV if the unit cost of QIV is the same as TIV (additional unit cost = USD0) in all 9 years (except year 2002). The number of years in which QIV was more cost-effective than TIV decreased in both age groups 65–79 years and ≥80 year when the unit cost of QIV increased by USD1-10 (Table 3). Our results were different from the findings of an economic study of QIV in the US [3]. Lee et al. reported positive cost savings (including both direct and indirect costs) by QIV when the unit cost of QIV was USD5-30 more than TIV, based upon infection rate reduction reported by Reed et al. In the present analysis, QIV would cost more to gain QALYs (as indicated by a positive value of ICER) in most of the years when QIV cost more than TIV by USD1-10. The difference was mainly caused by lower healthcare costs in Hong Kong comparing to the US for inpatient (USD1,800-6,600 versus USD4,221-11,372) and outpatient care (USD49 versus USD76-102). For every case of infection averted, less direct cost of treatment was saved in Hong Kong versus US because of the lower cost of care. In the present study, QIV was cost-effective in year 2007 at four cost levels (+USD1, +USD2, +USD5 and + USD10). The cost savings and QALYs gained by QIV were the highest in this year. It could be explained by the fact that a high percentage of circulating influenza B lineages in Hong Kong were not covered by TIV (92.9%) and the hospitalization rate for influenza B in the elderly was the highest in 2007 [1]. The cost-effectiveness of the influenza vaccine tends to be enhanced when the expected hospitalization rate without the vaccine is high [28]. The expected QALYs gained and cost savings of QIV were sufficient to overcome the economic impact of additional cost of QIV and it therefore remained cost-effective over a broad range of additional vaccine cost. Our study was limited by using a single source (one teaching hospital) of influenza B hospital admission rates and circulating virus lineages for the calculation of population-based influenza B infection rate in Hong Kong elderly. The infection rate was estimated by the case-fatality ratio, yet this information was not available from Hong Kong. A case-fatality ratio derived from US was used, as the estimated influenza-related mortality rates were generally similar in Hong Kong and the US [29],[30]. We assumed that patients in the outpatient setting would seek care at medical clinic for one time, as Chinese older people in Hong Kong tend to perceive influenza as a serious illness [31]. Some patients would use home remedies or over-the-counter preparation to alleviate influenza symptoms, and the cost-saving of QIV might be overestimated. On the other hand, the QALYs loss of caregivers was not included in the analysis and the QALY saved by QIV might therefore be underestimated. The current cost and QALYs were calculated based upon the vaccine coverage of 39.1% and herd immunity effect was not included in the analysis. The study findings are likely to change if the vaccine coverage is improved in elderly (and therefore generates herd immunity), probably showing more prominent saving in cost and QALYs with QIV comparing to TIV. Sensitivity analysis was not conducted in the present study. Expected cost and clinical outcomes were calculated for 9 seasons using year-specific key parameters. The change of cost and clinical outcomes was found to be sensitive to the variation of key year-specific parameters (namely the percentage of circulating TIV-unmatched influenza B lineage and hospitalization rate). Using year-specific inputs has therefore served the purpose of sensitivity analysis.

Conclusions

In conclusion, QIV could reduce direct and indirect costs of influenza B infection and gain higher QALYs when compared to TIV in the elderly population of Hong Kong. The acceptance of QIV to be cost-effective in Hong Kong elderly was highly subject to the unit cost of QIV versus TIV and the percentage of circulating TIV-unmatched influenza B lineages.
  26 in total

Review 1.  One thousand health-related quality-of-life estimates.

Authors:  T O Tengs; A Wallace
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 2.983

2.  Post-exposure influenza prophylaxis with oseltamivir: cost effectiveness and cost utility in families in the UK.

Authors:  Beate Sander; Frederick G Hayden; Marlene Gyldmark; Louis P Garrison
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Seasonal influenza in the United States, France, and Australia: transmission and prospects for control.

Authors:  G Chowell; M A Miller; C Viboud
Journal:  Epidemiol Infect       Date:  2007-07-18       Impact factor: 2.451

4.  Interim within-season estimate of the effectiveness of trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine--Marshfield, Wisconsin, 2007-08 influenza season.

Authors: 
Journal:  MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep       Date:  2008-04-18       Impact factor: 17.586

5.  Influenza B lineage circulation and hospitalization rates in a subtropical city, Hong Kong, 2000-2010.

Authors:  Paul K S Chan; Martin C W Chan; Jo L K Cheung; Nelson Lee; Ting F Leung; Apple C M Yeung; Martin C S Wong; Karry L K Ngai; E Anthony S Nelson; David S C Hui
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2012-10-16       Impact factor: 9.079

6.  The utility of different health states as perceived by the general public.

Authors:  D L Sackett; G W Torrance
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1978

7.  Prevention of symptomatic seasonal influenza in 2005-2006 by inactivated and live attenuated vaccines.

Authors:  Suzanne E Ohmit; John C Victor; Esther R Teich; Rachel K Truscon; Judy R Rotthoff; Duane W Newton; Sarah A Campbell; Matthew L Boulton; Arnold S Monto
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  2008-08-01       Impact factor: 5.226

8.  Cost-effectiveness of newer treatment strategies for influenza.

Authors:  Kenneth J Smith; Mark S Roberts
Journal:  Am J Med       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 4.965

9.  Toward consistency in cost-utility analyses: using national measures to create condition-specific values.

Authors:  M R Gold; P Franks; K I McCoy; D G Fryback
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 2.983

10.  Management of influenza symptoms in healthy adults.

Authors:  Michael B Rothberg; Shunian He; David N Rose
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 5.128

View more
  14 in total

Review 1.  Effects of influenza immunization on pneumonia in the elderly.

Authors:  Jung Yeon Heo; Joon Young Song; Ji Yun Noh; Min Joo Choi; Jin Gu Yoon; Saem Na Lee; Hee Jin Cheong; Woo Joo Kim
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2017-12-19       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  Cost-effectiveness analysis of quadrivalent versus trivalent influenza vaccine in Taiwan: A lifetime multi-cohort model.

Authors:  Ming-Chin Yang; Elise Chia-Hui Tan; Jian-Jhih Su
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2016-09-13       Impact factor: 3.452

3.  Impact of COVID-19 infection control measures on influenza-related outcomes in Hong Kong.

Authors:  Joyce H S You
Journal:  Pathog Glob Health       Date:  2020-12-15       Impact factor: 2.894

4.  Seasonal influenza vaccination for children in Thailand: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Aronrag Meeyai; Naiyana Praditsitthikorn; Surachai Kotirum; Wantanee Kulpeng; Weerasak Putthasri; Ben S Cooper; Yot Teerawattananon
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2015-05-26       Impact factor: 11.069

Review 5.  A review of the value of quadrivalent influenza vaccines and their potential contribution to influenza control.

Authors:  Riju Ray; Gaël Dos Santos; Philip O Buck; Carine Claeys; Gonçalo Matias; Bruce L Innis; Rafik Bekkat-Berkani
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2017-05-22       Impact factor: 3.452

6.  Cost-effectiveness of molecular point-of-care testing for influenza viruses in elderly patients at ambulatory care setting.

Authors:  Joyce H S You; Lok-Pui Tam; Nelson L S Lee
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-07-27       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  An Assessment of the Expected Cost-Effectiveness of Quadrivalent Influenza Vaccines in Ontario, Canada Using a Static Model.

Authors:  Ayman Chit; Julie Roiz; Samuel Aballea
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-29       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Assessment of potential public health impact of a quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine in Thailand.

Authors:  Wanitchaya Kittikraisak; Malinee Chittaganpitch; Christopher J Gregory; Yongjua Laosiritaworn; Thanawadee Thantithaveewat; Fatimah S Dawood; Kim A Lindblade
Journal:  Influenza Other Respir Viruses       Date:  2016-01-29       Impact factor: 4.380

Review 9.  Unremarked or Unperformed? Systematic Review on Reporting of Validation Efforts of Health Economic Decision Models in Seasonal Influenza and Early Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Pieter T de Boer; Geert W J Frederix; Talitha L Feenstra; Pepijn Vemer
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 4.981

10.  Hospitalization Incidence, Mortality, and Seasonality of Common Respiratory Viruses Over a Period of 15 Years in a Developed Subtropical City.

Authors:  Paul K S Chan; Wilson W S Tam; Tsz Cheung Lee; Kam Lun Hon; Nelson Lee; Martin C W Chan; Hing Yim Mok; Martin C S Wong; Ting Fan Leung; Raymond W M Lai; Apple C M Yeung; Wendy C S Ho; E Anthony S Nelson; David S C Hui
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 1.817

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.