IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharmo/v5y2021i4d10.1007_s41669-021-00269-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Inclusion of Additional Unintended Consequences in Economic Evaluation: A Systematic Review of Immunization and Tuberculosis Cost-Effectiveness Analyses

Author

Listed:
  • Liv Solvår Nymark

    (The Academic Medical Center (AMC), The University of Amsterdam)

  • Alex Miller

    (Independent Researcher)

  • Anna Vassall

    (The Academic Medical Center (AMC), The University of Amsterdam
    London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine)

Abstract

Objective Our objective was to review economic evaluations of immunization and tuberculosis to determine the extent to which additional unintended consequences were taken into account in the analysis and to describe the methodological approaches used to estimate these, where possible. Methods We sourced the vaccine economic evaluations from a previous systematic review by Nymark et al. (2009–2015) and searched PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase from 2015 to 2019 using the same search strategy. For tuberculosis economic evaluations, we extracted studies from 2009 to 2019 that were published in a previous review by Siapka et al. We followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidance. Studies were classified according to the categories and subcategories (e.g., herd immunity, non-specific effects, and labor productivity) defined in a framework identifying additional unintended consequences by Nymark and Vassall. Where possible, methods for estimating the additional unintended consequences categories and subcategories were described. We evaluated the reporting quality of included studies according to the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) extraction guideline. Results We identified 177 vaccine cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) between 2009 and 2019 that met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 98 included unintended consequences. Of the total 98 CEAs, overall health consequence categories were included 73 times; biological categories: herd immunity 43 times; pathogen response: resistance 15 times; and cross-protection 15 times. For health consequences pertaining to the supply-side (health systems) categories, side effects were included five times. On the nonhealth demand side (intrahousehold), labor productivity was included 60 times. We identified 29 tuberculosis CEAs from 2009 to 2019 that met the inclusion criteria. Of these, six articles included labor productivity, four included indirect transmission effects, and one included resistance. Between 2009 and 2019, only 34% of tuberculosis CEAs included additional unintended consequences, compared with 55% of vaccine CEAs. Conclusions The inclusion of additional unintended consequences in economic evaluations of immunization and tuberculosis continues to be limited. Additional unintended consequences of economic benefits, such as those examined in this review and especially those that occur outside the health system, offer valuable information to analysts. Further work on appropriate ways to value these additional unintended consequences is still warranted.

Suggested Citation

  • Liv Solvår Nymark & Alex Miller & Anna Vassall, 2021. "Inclusion of Additional Unintended Consequences in Economic Evaluation: A Systematic Review of Immunization and Tuberculosis Cost-Effectiveness Analyses," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 587-603, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharmo:v:5:y:2021:i:4:d:10.1007_s41669-021-00269-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s41669-021-00269-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s41669-021-00269-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s41669-021-00269-4?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. Christian Schaetti & Mitchell G Weiss & Said M Ali & Claire-Lise Chaignat & Ahmed M Khatib & Rita Reyburn & Radboud J Duintjer Tebbens & Raymond Hutubessy, 2012. "Costs of Illness Due to Cholera, Costs of Immunization and Cost-Effectiveness of an Oral Cholera Mass Vaccination Campaign in Zanzibar," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(10), pages 1-10, October.
    2. Christopher Fitzpatrick & Alexander Haines & Mathieu Bangert & Andrew Farlow & Janet Hemingway & Raman Velayudhan, 2017. "An economic evaluation of vector control in the age of a dengue vaccine," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(8), pages 1-27, August.
    3. Asrul Akmal Shafie & Hui Yee Yeo & Laurent Coudeville & Lucas Steinberg & Balvinder Singh Gill & Rohani Jahis & Amar-Singh HSS, 2017. "The Potential Cost Effectiveness of Different Dengue Vaccination Programmes in Malaysia: A Value-Based Pricing Assessment Using Dynamic Transmission Mathematical Modelling," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(5), pages 575-589, May.
    4. Johnie Rose & Laura Homa & Sharon B Meropol & Sara M Debanne & Roger Bielefeld & Claudia Hoyen & Mendel E Singer, 2017. "Health impact and cost-effectiveness of a domestically-produced rotavirus vaccine in India: A model based analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(11), pages 1-16, November.
    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.
    1. Aziz, Sonia & Pakhtigian, Emily L. & Akanda, Ali S. & Jutla, Antarpreet & Huq, Anwar & Alam, Munirul & Ashan, Gias U. & Colwell, Rita R., 2021. "Does improved risk information increase the value of cholera prevention? An analysis of stated vaccine demand in slum areas of urban Bangladesh," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 272(C).
    2. David A Roiz & Paulina A. Pontifes & Frédéric Jourdain & Christophe Diagne & Boris Leroy & Anne-Charlotte Vaissière & María José Tolsá-García & Jean-Michel Salles & Frédéric Simard & Franck Courchamp, 2024. "The rising global economic costs of invasive Aedes mosquitoes and Aedes-borne diseases," Post-Print hal-04573122, HAL.
    3. Auliya A. Suwantika & Angga P. Kautsar & Woro Supadmi & Neily Zakiyah & Rizky Abdulah & Mohammad Ali & Maarten J. Postma, 2020. "Cost-Effectiveness of Dengue Vaccination in Indonesia: Considering Integrated Programs with Wolbachia -Infected Mosquitos and Health Education," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-15, June.
    4. Azrah Anparasan & Miguel Lejeune, 2019. "Resource deployment and donation allocation for epidemic outbreaks," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 283(1), pages 9-32, December.
    5. Guido España & Yutong Yao & Kathryn B Anderson & Meagan C Fitzpatrick & David L Smith & Amy C Morrison & Annelies Wilder-Smith & Thomas W Scott & T Alex Perkins, 2019. "Model-based assessment of public health impact and cost-effectiveness of dengue vaccination following screening for prior exposure," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(7), pages 1-21, July.
    6. Siyu Ma & Tara A. Lavelle & Daniel A. Ollendorf & Pei-Jung Lin, 2022. "Herd Immunity Effects in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses among Low- and Middle-Income Countries," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 395-404, May.
    7. Gerhart Knerer & Christine S M Currie & Sally C Brailsford, 2020. "The economic impact and cost-effectiveness of combined vector-control and dengue vaccination strategies in Thailand: results from a dynamic transmission model," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-32, October.

    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:spr:pharmo:v:5:y:2021:i:4:d:10.1007_s41669-021-00269-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.