ArticleBMC health services research2024
Introduction of a hexavalent vaccine containing acellular pertussis into the national immunization program for infants in Peru: a cost-consequence analysis of vaccination coverage.
Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundInfant vaccination coverage rates in Peru have declined in recent years, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Introduction of the fully-liquid diphtheria, tetanus, and acellular pertussis (DTaP)-inactivated polio vaccine (IPV)-hepatitis B (HB)-Haemophilus influenzae type B (Hib) hexavalent vaccine (DTaP-IPV-HB-Hib) in Peru's infant National Immunization Program may help improve coverage. We evaluated costs and healthcare outcomes, including coverage, of switching from a pentavalent vaccine containing whole-cell pertussis component (DTwP-HB-Hib) plus IPV/oral polio vaccine (IPV/OPV) to the hexavalent vaccine for the primary vaccination scheme (2, 4 and 6 months).
methodsThe analysis was performed over a 5-year period on a cohort of children born in Peru in 2020 (N = 494,595). Four scenarios were considered: the pentavalent plus IPV/OPV scheme (S1); replacing the pentavalent plus IPV/OPV scheme with the hexavalent scheme (S2); expanded delivery of the pentavalent plus IPV/OPV scheme (S3); expanded delivery of the hexavalent scheme (S4). Vaccine coverage and incidence of adverse reactions (ARs) were estimated using Monte Carlo simulations and previous estimates from the literature. Cases of vaccine-preventable diseases were estimated using a Markov model. Logistical and healthcare costs associated with these outcomes were estimated. Impact of key variables (including coverage rates, incidence of ARs and vaccine prices) on costs was evaluated in sensitivity analyses.
resultsThe overall cost from a public health payer perspective associated with the pentavalent plus IPV/OPV vaccine scheme (S1) was estimated at $56,719,350, increasing to $61,324,263 (+ 8.1%), $59,121,545 (+ 4.2%) and $64,872,734 (+ 14.4%) in scenarios S2, S3 and S4, respectively. Compared with the status quo (S1), coverage rates were estimated to increase by 3.1% points with expanded delivery alone, and by 9.4 and 14.3% points, if the hexavalent vaccine is deployed (S2 and S4, respectively). In both scenarios with the hexavalent vaccine (S2 and S4), pertussis cases would also be 5.7% and 8.7% lower, and AR rates would decrease by 32%. The cost per protected child would be reduced when the hexavalent vaccine scheme. Incidence of ARs was an important driver of cost variability in the sensitivity analysis.
conclusionsImplementation of the hexavalent vaccine in Peru's National Immunization Program has a positive public health cost consequence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.