A systematic review published in Pharmacoeconomics and Policy evaluates the economic impact of vaccination strategies in mainland China, focusing on 133 studies assessing 20 vaccines. The aim was to guide policymakers based on the findings on cost-effective vaccination strategies for China’s National Immunization Program (NIP).
Key vaccines assessed include hepatitis B, HPV, pneumococcal, influenza, and hepatitis A, with the majority of studies showing that these vaccines are cost-effective and should be expanded in the NIP. The authors found that most studies used cost-utility analysis (CUA) and static models, with societal perspectives being the most common.
Notably, the findings revealed that many vaccination strategies, such as hepatitis B and domestic HPV-2, have an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) lower than gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, making them cost-effective. However, the herpes zoster vaccine showed an ICER higher than three times the GDP per capita, suggesting it should not be prioritized.
Furthermore, quality assessment revealed that 36 studies were of high quality, 91 moderate, and 4 low, with challenges in establishing clinical effectiveness and valuing costs. The authors conclude that expanding vaccination coverage for cost-effective vaccines is crucial, while improving the quality of economic evaluations in future studies is necessary.
###
Contact the author: Beibei Yuan, China Center for Health Development Studies, Peking University, Beijing, China
The publisher KeAi was established by Elsevier and China Science Publishing & Media Ltd to unfold quality research globally. In 2013, our focus shifted to open access publishing. We now proudly publish more than 200 world-class, open access, English language journals, spanning all scientific disciplines. Many of these are titles we publish in partnership with prestigious societies and academic institutions, such as the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC).
Pharmacoeconomics and Policy
Literature review
Not applicable
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.