| Printable Copy |
 |
| Printable Copy |
|
Vaccine. 2013 May 31;31(24):2661-6. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2013.04.014. Epub 2013 Apr 17.
Bae GR1 Choe YJ Go UY Kim YI Lee JK.
In this study we modeled the cost benefit analysis for three different measles vaccination strategies based upon three different measles-containing vaccines in Korea 2001. We employed an economic analysis model using vaccination coverage data and population-based measles surveillance data along with available estimates of the costs for the different strategies. In addition we have included analysis on benefit of reduction of complication by mumps and rubella.
We evaluated four different strategies: strategy 1 keep-up program with a second dose measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine at 4-6 years without catch-up campaign; strategy 2 additional catch-up campaign with measles (M) vaccine; strategy 3 catch-up campaign with measles-rubella (MR) vaccine; and strategy 4 catch-up campaign with MMR vaccine. The cost of vaccination included cost for vaccines vaccination practices and other administrative expenses. The direct benefit of estimated using data from National Health Insurance Company a government-operated system that reimburses all medical costs spent on designated illness in Korea.
With the routine one-dose MMR vaccination program we estimated a baseline of 178560 measles cases over the 20 years; when the catch-up campaign with M MR or MMR vaccines was conducted we estimated the measles cases would decrease to 5936 cases. Among all strategies the two-dose MMR keep-up program with MR catch-up campaign showed the highest benefit-cost ratio of 1.27 with a net benefit of 51.6 billion KRW.
Across different vaccination strategies our finding suggest that MR catch-up campaign in conjunction with two-dose MMR keep-up program was the most appropriate option in terms of economic costs and public health effects associated with measles elimination strategy in Korea.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved