Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32975187›Full record

ArticleEuro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin2020

Rabies vaccination strategies in the Netherlands in 2018: a cost evaluation.

Anita Wm Suijkerbuijk, Marie-Josee J Mangen, Manon R Haverkate, Floriana S Luppino, Sabine E Bantjes, Leo G Visser, Corien M Swaan, Wilhelmina Lm Ruijs, Eelco Ab Over

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Anita Wm SuijkerbuijkNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, RIVM, Bilthoven, the Netherlands.
Marie-Josee J MangenNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, RIVM, Bilthoven, the Netherlands.
Manon R HaverkateNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, RIVM, Bilthoven, the Netherlands.
Floriana S LuppinoEurocross Assistance, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Sabine E BantjesNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, RIVM, Bilthoven, the Netherlands.
Leo G VisserLeiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Corien M SwaanNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, RIVM, Bilthoven, the Netherlands.
Wilhelmina Lm RuijsNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, RIVM, Bilthoven, the Netherlands.
Eelco Ab OverNational Institute for Public Health and the Environment, RIVM, Bilthoven, the Netherlands.
National Institute for Public Health and the Environment · NLEurotransplant · NLLeiden University · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BackgroundThe risk of contracting rabies is low for travellers. However, the number of Dutch travellers potentially exposed abroad following an animal-associated injury and needing post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) has increased, resulting in increased costs.AimHere, we evaluated the costs and the cost-effectiveness of different pre- and post-exposure interventions in the Netherlands, taking into account the 2018 World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations for the prevention of rabies.MethodsA decision tree-based economic model was constructed. We calculated and compared the cost of different WHO pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) recommendations, intramuscular vs intradermal vaccination and PEP subsequent to increased vaccination coverage in risk groups. We estimated cost-effectiveness, expressed as incremental costs per rabies immunoglobulin (RIG) administration averted, using a societal perspective. Statistical uncertainty regarding number of travellers and vaccination coverage was assessed.ResultsTotal costs at the national level were highest using previous WHO recommendations from 2012, estimated at EUR 15.4 million annually. Intradermal vaccinations in combination with the current recommendations led to the lowest costs, estimated at EUR 10.3 million. Higher vaccination uptake resulted in higher overall costs. The incremental costs per RIG administration averted varied from EUR 21,300-46,800.ConclusionsThe change in rabies PrEP and PEP recommendations in 2018 reduced total costs. Strategies with increased pre-travel vaccination uptake led to fewer RIG administrations and fewer vaccinations after exposure but also to higher total costs. Although larger scale intradermal administration of rabies vaccine can reduce total costs of PrEP and can positively influence vaccination uptake, it remains a costly intervention.

Indexed as

AnimalsCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansModels, EconomicPost-Exposure ProphylaxisPre-Exposure ProphylaxisRabiesRabies VaccinesRabies virusVaccinationRabies Vaccinescost analysiscost-effectiveness analysiscostsNetherlandspost-exposure prophylaxispre-exposure prophylaxisrabiesvaccination

Identifiers

PMID32975187
PMCPMC7533619
OpenAlexW3087777524

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.