• Angel Paternina-Caicedo, Fernando De la Hoz-Restrepo, and Nelson Alvis-Guzmán.
• From the *Grupo de Investigación en Economía de la Salud, Universidad de Cartagena. Cartagena, Colombia; †Grupo de Investigación Infectología Pediátrica, Hospital Infantil Napoleón Franco Pareja, Cartagena, Colombia; ‡Grupo de Investigación en Epidemiología y Evaluación en Salud Pública, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia.
• Pediatr. Infect. Dis. J. 2015 Jul 1; 34 (7): e176-84.

BackgroundThe competing choices of vaccination with either RV1 or RV5, the potential budget impact of vaccines on the EPI with different prices and new evidence make important an updated analysis for health decision makers in each country. The objective of this study is to assess cost-effectiveness of the monovalent and pentavalent rotavirus vaccines and impact on children deaths, inpatient and outpatient visits in 116 low and middle income countries that represent approximately 99% of rotavirus mortality.MethodsA decision tree model followed hypothetical cohorts of children from birth up to 5 years of age for each country in 2010. Inputs were gathered from international databases and previous research on incidence and effectiveness of monovalent and pentavalent vaccines. Costs were expressed in 2010 international dollars. Outcomes were reported in terms of cost per disability-adjusted life-year averted, comparing no vaccination with either monovalent or pentavalent mass introduction. Vaccine price was assumed fixed for all world low-income and middle-income countries.ResultsAround 292,000 deaths, 3.34 million inpatient cases and 23.09 million outpatient cases would occur with no vaccination. In the base-case scenario, monovalent vaccination would prevent 54.7% of inpatient cases and 45.4% of deaths. Pentavalent vaccination would prevent 51.4% of inpatient cases and 41.1% of deaths. The vaccine was cost-effective in all world countries in the base-case scenario for both vaccines. Cost per disability-adjusted life-year averted in all selected countries was I$372 for monovalent, and I$453 for pentavalent vaccination.ConclusionRotavirus vaccine is cost-effective in most analyzed countries. Despite cost-effectiveness analysis is a useful tool for decision making in middle-income countries, for low-income countries health decision makers should also assess the impact of introducing either vaccine on local resources and budget impact analysis of vaccination.

27 keywords...

hide…