Does Choice of Influenza Vaccine Type Change Disease Burden and Cost-Effectiveness in the United States? An Agent-Based Modeling Study

美国流感疫苗类型的选择是否会改变疾病负担和成本效益?一项基于代理建模的研究

阅读:1

Abstract

Offering a choice of influenza vaccine type may increase vaccine coverage and reduce disease burden, but it is more costly. This study calculated the public health impact and cost-effectiveness of 4 strategies: no choice, pediatric choice, adult choice, or choice for both age groups. Using agent-based modeling, individuals were simulated as they interacted with others, and influenza was tracked as it spread through a population in Washington, DC. Influenza vaccination coverage derived from data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was increased by 6.5% (range, 3.25%-11.25%), reflecting changes due to vaccine choice. With moderate influenza infectivity, the number of cases averaged 1,117,285 for no choice, 1,083,126 for pediatric choice, 1,009,026 for adult choice, and 975,818 for choice for both age groups. Averted cases increased with increased coverage and were highest for the choice-for-both-age-groups strategy; adult choice also reduced cases in children. In cost-effectiveness analysis, choice for both age groups was dominant when choice increased vaccine coverage by ≥3.25%. Offering a choice of influenza vaccines, with reasonable resultant increases in coverage, decreased influenza cases by >100,000 with a favorable cost-effectiveness profile. Clinical trials testing the predictions made based on these simulation results and deliberation of policies and procedures to facilitate choice should be considered.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。