ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research
Open access peer-reviewed scientific and medical journals.
Dove Medical Press is now a member of the Open Access Initiative
An Author's Guide
A guide to help authors get their paper published.
Support Open Access and Dove Press
Promotional Article Monitoring - further details
Favored Author Program
Real benefits for authors, including fast-track processing of papers.
Cost-effectiveness analysis of intranasal live attenuated vaccine (LAIV) versus injectable inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) for Canadian children and adolescents
(2935) Total Article Views
Authors: Tarride JE, Burke N, Von Keyserlingk C, O'Reilly D, Xie F, Goeree R
Published Date October 2012
Volume 2012:4 Pages 287 - 298
|Received:||01 May 2012|
|Accepted:||21 June 2012|
|Published:||04 October 2012|
1Programs for Assessment of Technology in Health (PATH) Research Institute, St Joseph's Healthcare Hamilton, Hamilton, 2Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Background: Influenza affects all age groups and is common in children. Between 15% and 42% of preschool- and school-aged children experience influenza each season. Recently, intranasal live attenuated influenza vaccine, trivalent (LAIV) has been approved in Canada.
Objective: The objective of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of LAIV compared with that of the injectable inactivated influenza vaccine, trivalent (TIV) in Canadian children and adolescents from both a payer (eg. Ministry of Health) perspective and a societal perspective.
Methods: A cost-effectiveness model comparing LAIV and TIV in children aged 24–59 months old was supplemented by primary (ie, a survey of 144 Canadian physicians) and secondary (eg, literature) data to model children aged 2–17 years old. Parameter uncertainty was addressed through univariate and probability analyses.
Results: Although LAIV increased vaccination costs when compared to TIV, LAIV reduced the number of influenza cases and lowered the number of hospitalizations, emergency room visits, outpatient visits, and parents’ days lost from work. The estimated offsets in direct and societal costs saved were CAD$4.20 and CAD$35.34, respectively, per vaccinated child aged 2–17 years old. When costs and outcomes were considered, LAIV when compared to TIV, was the dominant strategy. At a willingness to pay of CAD$50,000 per quality adjusted life year gained, or CAD$100,000 per quality adjusted life year gained, the probabilistic results indicated that the probability of LAIV being cost-effective was almost 1.
Conclusions: LAIV reduces the burden of influenza in children and adolescents. Consistent with previously reported results, vaccinating children with LAIV, rather than TIV, is the dominant strategy from both a societal perspective and a Ministry of Health perspective.
Keywords: influenza, vaccine, children, cost-effectiveness
Cannotea Citeulike Del.icio.us Facebook LinkedIn Twitter
Other articles by Dr Jean-Eric Tarride
Readers of this article also read:
"I was impressed at the rapidity of publication from submission to final acceptance." Dr Edwin Thrower, PhD, Yale University.
- Reliability and validity of the Mywellness Key physical activity monitor
- Evidence-based decision-making within the context of globalization: A “Why–What–How” for leaders and managers of health care organizations
- "Globalized public health.” A transdisciplinary comprehensive framework for analyzing contemporary globalization’s influences on the field of public health
- Hepatitis C virus infection and risk of cancer: a population-based cohort study