IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0254080.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Clinical and economic impact of universal varicella vaccination in Norway: A modeling study

Author

Listed:
  • Manjiri Pawaskar
  • Colleen Burgess
  • Mathew Pillsbury
  • Torbjørn Wisløff
  • Elmira Flem

Abstract

Background: Norway has not implemented universal varicella vaccination, despite the considerable clinical and economic burden of varicella disease. Methods: An existing dynamic transmission model of varicella infection was calibrated to age-specific seroprevalence rates in Norway. Six two-dose vaccination strategies were considered, consisting of combinations of two formulations each of a monovalent varicella vaccine (Varivax® or Varilrix®) and a quadrivalent vaccine against measles-mumps-rubella-varicella (ProQuad® or PriorixTetra®), with the first dose given with a monovalent vaccine at age 15 months, and the second dose with either a monovalent or quadrivalent vaccine at either 18 months, 7 or 11 years. Costs were considered from the perspectives of both the health care system and society. Quality-adjusted life-years saved and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios relative to no vaccination were calculated. A one-way sensitivity analysis was conducted to assess the impact of vaccine efficacy, price, the costs of a lost workday and of inpatient and outpatient care, vaccination coverage, and discount rate. Results: In the absence of varicella vaccination, the annual incidence of natural varicella is estimated to be 1,359 per 100,000 population, and the cumulative numbers of varicella outpatient cases, hospitalizations, and deaths over 50 years are projected to be 1.81 million, 10,161, and 61, respectively. Universal varicella vaccination is projected to reduce the natural varicella incidence rate to 48–59 per 100,000 population, depending on the vaccination strategy, and to reduce varicella outpatient cases, hospitalizations, and deaths by 75–85%, 67–79%, and 75–79%, respectively. All strategies were cost-saving, with the most cost-saving as two doses of Varivax® at 15 months and 7 years (payer perspective) and two doses of Varivax® at 15 months and 18 months (societal perspective). Conclusions: All modeled two-dose varicella vaccination strategies are projected to lead to substantial reductions in varicella disease and to be cost saving compared to no vaccination in Norway.

Suggested Citation

  • Manjiri Pawaskar & Colleen Burgess & Mathew Pillsbury & Torbjørn Wisløff & Elmira Flem, 2021. "Clinical and economic impact of universal varicella vaccination in Norway: A modeling study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(7), pages 1-14, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0254080
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0254080
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0254080
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0254080&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0254080?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. Lara J Wolfson & Vincent J Daniels & Matthew Pillsbury & Zafer Kurugöl & Cuneyt Yardimci & Jeffrey Kyle & Ener Cagri Dinleyici, 2019. "Cost-effectiveness analysis of universal varicella vaccination in Turkey using a dynamic transmission model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-26, August.
    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:pone00:0254080. 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.