OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the cost-effectiveness of hepatitis A immunization in Indonesia, including an explicit comparison between one-dose and two-dose vaccines. METHODS: An age-structured cohort model based on a decision tree was developed for the 2012 Indonesia birth cohort. Using the model, we made a comparison on the use of two-dose and one-dose vaccines. The model involved a 70-year time horizon with 1-month cycles for children less than 2 years old and annually thereafter. Monte Carlo simulations were used to examine the economic acceptability and affordability of the hepatitis A vaccination. RESULTS: Vaccination would save US$ 3,795,148 and US$ 2,892,920 from the societal perspective, for the two-dose and one-dose vaccine schedules, respectively, in the context of hepatitis A treatment. It also would save 8917 and 6614 discounted quality-adjusted-life-years (QALYs), respectively. With the vaccine price of US$ 3.21 per dose, the implementation of single dose vaccine would yield an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of US$ 4933 per QALY gained versus no vaccination, whereas the two-dose versus one-dose schedule would cost US$ 14 568 per QALY gained. Considering the 2012 gross-domestic-product (GDP) per capita in Indonesia of US$ 3557, the results indicate that hepatitis A vaccination would be a cost-effective intervention, both for the two-dose and one-dose vaccine schedules in isolation, but two-dose vaccination would no longer be cost-effective if one-dose vaccination is a feasible option. Vaccination would be 100% affordable at budgets of US$ 71,408 000 and US$ 37,690,000 for the implementation of the two-dose and one-dose vaccine schedules, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of hepatitis A vaccination in Indonesia would be a cost-effective health intervention under the market vaccine price. Given the budget limitations, the use of a one-dose-vaccine schedule would be more realistic to be applied than a two-dose schedule. The vaccine price, mortality rate and discount rate were the most influential parameters impacting the ICERs.
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the cost-effectiveness of hepatitis A immunization in Indonesia, including an explicit comparison between one-dose and two-dose vaccines. METHODS: An age-structured cohort model based on a decision tree was developed for the 2012 Indonesia birth cohort. Using the model, we made a comparison on the use of two-dose and one-dose vaccines. The model involved a 70-year time horizon with 1-month cycles for children less than 2 years old and annually thereafter. Monte Carlo simulations were used to examine the economic acceptability and affordability of the hepatitis A vaccination. RESULTS: Vaccination would save US$ 3,795,148 and US$ 2,892,920 from the societal perspective, for the two-dose and one-dose vaccine schedules, respectively, in the context of hepatitis A treatment. It also would save 8917 and 6614 discounted quality-adjusted-life-years (QALYs), respectively. With the vaccine price of US$ 3.21 per dose, the implementation of single dose vaccine would yield an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of US$ 4933 per QALY gained versus no vaccination, whereas the two-dose versus one-dose schedule would cost US$ 14 568 per QALY gained. Considering the 2012 gross-domestic-product (GDP) per capita in Indonesia of US$ 3557, the results indicate that hepatitis A vaccination would be a cost-effective intervention, both for the two-dose and one-dose vaccine schedules in isolation, but two-dose vaccination would no longer be cost-effective if one-dose vaccination is a feasible option. Vaccination would be 100% affordable at budgets of US$ 71,408 000 and US$ 37,690,000 for the implementation of the two-dose and one-dose vaccine schedules, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of hepatitis A vaccination in Indonesia would be a cost-effective health intervention under the market vaccine price. Given the budget limitations, the use of a one-dose-vaccine schedule would be more realistic to be applied than a two-dose schedule. The vaccine price, mortality rate and discount rate were the most influential parameters impacting the ICERs.
Authors: Siswanto Agus Wilopo; Paul Kilgore; Soewarta Kosen; Yati Soenarto; Sri Aminah; Anton Cahyono; Maria Ulfa; Abu Tholib Journal: Vaccine Date: 2009-11-20 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Yasinta Rakanita; Mas Rizky A A Syamsunarno; Rano K Sinuraya; Eka W Suradji; Rizky Abdulah; Auliya A Suwantika Journal: Ther Clin Risk Manag Date: 2021-10-01 Impact factor: 2.423
Authors: Auliya A Suwantika; Angga P Kautsar; Woro Supadmi; Neily Zakiyah; Rizky Abdulah; Mohammad Ali; Maarten J Postma Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-06-12 Impact factor: 3.390