Cost-effective analysis of seasonal influenza vaccine in elderly Chinese population
10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-9624.2019.10.008
- VernacularTitle: 中国老人接种流感疫苗的成本效果分析
- Author:
Chen CHEN
1
;
Guoen LIU
1
;
Meijiao WANG
1
;
Tianfu GAO
2
;
Huiping JIA
2
;
Han YANG
2
;
Luzhao FENG
3
Author Information
1. National School of Development, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
2. China Center for Health Economic Research, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
3. Division of Infectious Diseases, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing 102206, China
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Influenza vaccines;
Cost-effectiveness analysis;
Markov model
- From:
Chinese Journal of Preventive Medicine
2019;53(10):993-999
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of seasonal influenza vaccination, compared to no vaccination, for the elderly aged ≥60 years old in China.
Methods:A static life-time Markov model is conducted to simulate the Chinese elderly population aged ≥60 years old. Taking the health care system perspective, one-year analytic cycle length is used for each influenza season. The model was assumed to be repeated until the individual reaches 100 years old. Three interventions were evaluated, including no vaccination, annual trivalent influenza vaccination, and annual quadrivalent influenza vaccination. Using the threshold of 3 times GDP per capita per Quality-adjusted life year (QALY) (193 932/QALY), the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated to compare the cost-effectiveness of every two interventions.Model inputs like data for costs and utilities were from studies on Chinese population if they were available. QALY was used to measure health utility. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were adopted to quantify the level of confidence of the model output.
Results:The total influenza associated costs of no vaccination would be 603 CNY per person, while the total costs of annual trivalent vaccination would be 1 027 CNY. Using trivalent vaccine would result in 0.007 QALY gained per person compared to no vaccination, with an increased cost of 424 CNY per person. The ICER of trivalent vaccination over no vaccination for all the elderly population in China would be 64 026 CNY per QALY gained, which was less than the threshold of 3 times GDP per capita. The total costs of annual quadrivalent vaccination would be 1 988 CNY. Using quadrivalent vaccine would result in 0.008 additional QALY gained per person compared to no vaccination, with an increased cost of 1 385 CNY per person. The ICER of quadrivalent vaccination over no vaccination would be 174 081 CNY per QALY gained, which was less than the threshold of 3 times GDP per capita.
Conclusion:Vaccinating elderly population would improve health utilities at higher health care costs for the elderly. Using the threshold of 3 times GDP per capita per QALY (193 932/QALY), both trivalent and quadrivalent vaccination would be cost-effective compared to no vaccination in elderly Chinese population.
