From: Health economics of rubella: a systematic review to assess the value of rubella vaccination
First author [Reference] | Stray-Pedersen [[25]] | White [[26]] | Hatzandrieu [[27]] | Schoenbaum [[24]] |
---|---|---|---|---|
Country | Norway | USA | USA | USA |
Year | 1982 | 1985 | 1994 | 1976 |
WB income group | High | High | High | High |
Comparators | 1. Vaccinate infant girls | 1. Rubella vaccination | 1. Rubella vaccination | 1. Vaccinate all 2-yr-olds |
 | 2. Vaccinate pubertal girls | 2. MMR vaccination | 2. MMR vaccination | 2. Vaccinate all 6-yr-olds |
 |  |  |  | 3. Vaccinate all 12-yr-olds |
 |  |  |  | 4. Vaccinate 2-yr-olds and 12-yr-olds |
Perspective | Societal | Societal | Societal | Societal |
Cost components measured | Vaccine; immunization; serology; CRS treatment (including special care; indirect costs (lost productivity and premature mortality) | Vaccine; immunization; physician visits; hospitalization; supportive care; special schooling; institutionalization; indirect costs (lost wages, lost lifetime earnings due to retardation or death) | Vaccine; immunization; physician visits; hospitalization; supportive care; special schooling; institutionalization; indirect costs (lost wages, lost lifetime earnings due to retardation or death) | Vaccine; immunization; OP care; hospitalization; CRS treatment and care; indirect costs (lost lifetime earnings) |
Method of cost estimation | Micro-costing (for vaccination and treatment; expected lifetime earnings (for indirect costs) | Micro-costing (for direct costs; expected lifetime earnings (for indirect costs) | Micro-costing (for direct costs; expected lifetime earnings (for indirect costs) | Micro-costing (for direct costs; expected lifetime earnings (for indirect costs) |
Method of benefits estimation | Averted costs | Averted costs | Averted costs | Averted costs |
Time period for costs and benefits | Lifetime | Lifetime | Lifetime | Lifetime |
Discounting (Rate) | Yes (7%) | Yes (10%) | Yes (10%) | Yes (6%) |
Results—Benefit-cost ratio | 1. 5 | 1. 7.7 | 1. 11.1 | 1. 8 |
 | 2. 11 | 2. 14.4 | 2. 21.3 | 2. 9 |
 |  |  |  | 3. 27 |
 |  |  |  | 4. 8 |
Stated conclusion | Vaccination of pubertal girls preferable | Routine MMR vaccine program was cost-effective | Routine MMR vaccine program was cost-effective | Vaccination at 12 years better than vaccination at other ages |
Sponsor | NR | CDC* | CDC* | NR |