IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0227945.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The cost-effectiveness of using pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) versus pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23), in South African adults

Author

Listed:
  • Charles Feldman
  • Sipho K Dlamini
  • Shabir A Madhi
  • Susan Meiring
  • Anne von Gottberg
  • Janetta C de Beer
  • Margreet de Necker
  • Marthinus P Stander

Abstract

Streptococcus pneumoniae (pneumococcus) remains an important cause of morbidity and mortality. Pneumococcal vaccination is part of the South African pediatric public immunization program but the potential cost-effectiveness of such an intervention for adults is unknown. This study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of two widely used pneumococcal vaccines: pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) and pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23) in South African adults, 18 years and older. Four analyses were carried out in a) both the private and public health care sectors; and b) for the HIV-infected population alone and for the total mixed population (all HIV-infected and -uninfected people). A previously published global pharmacoeconomic model was adapted and populated to represent the South African adult population. The model utilized a Markov-type process to depict the lifetime clinical and economic outcomes of patients who acquire pneumococcal disease in 2015, from a societal perspective. Costs were sourced in South African rand and converted to US dollar (USD). The incremental cost divided by the incremental effectiveness (expressed as quality-adjusted life years gained) represented the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for PCV13 compared to PPSV23. Results indicated that the use of PCV13 compared to PPSV23 is highly cost-effective in the public sector cohorts with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $771 (R11,106)/quality-adjusted life year and $956 (R13,773)/quality-adjusted life year for the HIV-infected and mixed populations, respectively. The private sector cohort showed similar highly cost-effective results for the mixed population (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio $626 (R9,013)/quality-adjusted life year) and the HIV-infected cohort (dominant). In sensitivity analysis, the model was sensitive to vaccine price and effectiveness. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses found predominantly cost-effective ICERs. From a societal perspective, these findings provide some guidance to policy makers for consideration and implementation of an immunization strategy for both the public and private sector and amongst different adult patient pools in South Africa.

Suggested Citation

  • Charles Feldman & Sipho K Dlamini & Shabir A Madhi & Susan Meiring & Anne von Gottberg & Janetta C de Beer & Margreet de Necker & Marthinus P Stander, 2020. "The cost-effectiveness of using pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) versus pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23), in South African adults," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-49, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0227945
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0227945
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0227945
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0227945&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0227945?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Maiwenn Al, 2013. "Cost-Effectiveness Acceptability Curves Revisited," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 93-100, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0227945. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.