Cost-effectiveness and economic benefits of vaccines in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review

Department of International Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615N. Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD 21205, United States. Electronic address: .
Vaccine (Impact Factor: 3.62). 11/2012; 31(1). DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.10.103
Source: PubMed


Public health interventions that prevent mortality and morbidity have greatly increased over the past decade. Immunization is one of these preventive interventions, with a potential to bring economic benefits beyond just health benefits. While vaccines are considered to be a cost-effective public health intervention, implementation has become increasingly challenging. As vaccine costs rise and competing priorities increase, economic evidence is likely to play an increasingly important role in vaccination decisions.

To assist policy decisions today and potential investments in the future, we provide a systematic review of the literature on the cost-effectiveness and economic benefits of vaccines in low- and middle-income countries from 2000 to 2010. The review identified 108 relevant articles from 51 countries spanning 23 vaccines from three major electronic databases (Pubmed, Embase and Econlit).

Among the 44 articles that reported costs per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted, vaccines cost less than or equal to $100 per DALY averted in 23 articles (52%). Vaccines cost less than $500 per DALY averted in 34 articles (77%), and less than $1000 per DALY averted in 38 articles (86%) in one of the scenarios. 24 articles (22%) examined broad level economic benefits of vaccines such as greater future wage-earning capacity and cost savings from averting disease outbreaks. 60 articles (56%) gathered data from a primary source. There were little data on long-term and societal economic benefits such as morbidity-related productivity gains, averting catastrophic health expenditures, growth in gross domestic product (GDP), and economic implications of demographic changes resulting from vaccination.

This review documents the available evidence and shows that vaccination in low- and middle-income countries brings important economic benefits. The cost-effectiveness studies reviewed suggest to policy makers that vaccines are an efficient investment. This review further highlights key gaps in the available literature that would benefit from additional research, especially in the area of evaluating the broader economic benefits of vaccination in the developing world.

Download full-text


Available from: Sachiko Ozawa, Mar 18, 2015
    • "Vaccines provide health benefits not only for the immunized child, but also for the community as a whole through herd immunity. In addition, studies have shown that immunization extends life expectancy and contributes to economic growth [3] [4]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Immunization is one of the most cost-effective health interventions, but as countries introduce new vaccines and scale-up immunization coverage, costs will likely increase. This paper updates estimates of immunization costs and financing based on information from comprehensive multi-year plans (cMYPs) from GAVI-eligible countries during a period when countries planned to introduce a range of new vaccines (2008-2016). The analysis database included information from baseline and 5-year projection years for each country cMYP, resulting in a total sample size of 243 observations. Two-thirds were from African countries. Cost data included personnel, vaccine, injection, transport, training, maintenance, cold chain and other capital investments. Financing from government and external sources was evaluated. All estimates were converted to 2010 US Dollars. Statistical analysis was performed using STATA, and results were population-weighted. Results pertain to country planning estimates. Average annual routine immunization cost was $62 million. Vaccines continued to be the major cost driver (51%) followed by immunization-specific personnel costs (22%). Non-vaccine delivery costs accounted for almost half of routine program costs (44%). Routine delivery cost per dose averaged $0.61 and the delivery cost per infant was $10. The cost per DTP3 vaccinated child was $27. Routine program costs increased with each new vaccine introduced. Costs accounted for 5% of government health expenditures. Governments accounted for 67% of financing. Total and average costs of routine immunization programs are rising as coverage rates increase and new vaccines are introduced. The cost of delivering vaccines is nearly equivalent to the cost of vaccines. Governments are financing greater proportions of the immunization program but there may be limits in resource scarce countries. Price reductions for new vaccines will help reduce costs and the burden of financing. Strategies to improve efficiency in service delivery should be pursued. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
    No preview · Article · May 2015 · Vaccine
  • Source
    • "Immunization is a proven and cost effective tool for control of infectious diseases [6] [7]. Vaccine preventable infections includes diphtheria, Haemophilus influenzae type B, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, human papilloma virus, influenza, measles, meningococcus, mumps, pertussis, pneumococcus, polio, rotavirus, rubella, smallpox, and tetanus. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background:Vaccines save more than 3 million lives and prevent 750,000 disabilities each year. Optimum immunization coverage will help in the fight against infectious diseases. This study was carried out to characterize current knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding immunizations in a rural Ghanaian community and to help identify reasons for delayed vaccination and suboptimal vaccination rates. Methods:A cross-sectional study was conducted in July 2013 on 156 parents and caregivers of children aged between 1 month and 5 years old. Structured questionnaires were administered to elicit responses on knowledge, attitudes, and practices towards childhood immunization. Results: Almost all study participants knew about vaccination (98.7%). However, unsolicited awareness of the benefits of vaccination was poor, and there existed knowledge gaps about vaccine preventable diseases. Nonetheless, most study participants (94.8%) acknowledged every child’s right to vaccination. The most prominent factors that influence the decision to participate in vaccination include recommendation by a local nurse (13.2%) or other health worker (10.4%), or a supportive spouse (11.8%). Adherence to vaccination schedules were generally low, but parents with a primary educational level were approximately 6 times more likely to adhere to vaccination schedules for the routine expanded programme on immunization vaccines than were parents with a secondary level of education. Conclusion:There was an almost universal awareness of vaccination among study participants. But poor knowledge of the benefits of vaccination and of vaccine preventable diseases ought to be addressed through education in order to promote improved and timely vaccination coverage.
    Full-text · Article · Aug 2014
  • Source
    • "Vaccines are the most cost-effective health intervention for the prevention of disease [1]. Since their invention, vaccines have been administered to billions of individuals with significant health and economic benefits, particularly to people in low-and middleincome countries [2] [3]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Financing for global health is a critical element of research and development. Innovations in new vaccines are critically dependent on research funding given the large sums required, however estimates of global research investments are lacking. We evaluate infectious disease research investments, focusing on immunology and vaccine research by UK research funding organisations. In 1997-2010, £2.6 billion were spent by public and philanthropic organisations, with £590 million allocated to immunology and vaccine research. Preclinical studies received the largest funding amount £505 million accounting for 85.6% of total investment. In terms of specific infection, "the big three" infections dominated funding: HIV received £127 million (21.5% of total), malaria received £59 million (10.0% of total) and tuberculosis received £36 million (6.0% of total). We excluded industry funding from our analysis, as open-access data were unavailable. A global investment surveillance system is needed to map and monitor funding and guide allocation of scarce resources.
    Full-text · Article · Oct 2013 · Vaccine
Show more