Productivity loss/gain in cost-effectiveness analyses for vaccines: a systematic review
Open Access
- 4 March 2021
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Taylor & Francis Ltd in Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research
- Vol. 21 (2), 235-245
- https://doi.org/10.1080/14737167.2021.1881484
Abstract
Introduction: The kinds of costs included in cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) for vaccines, such as direct medical costs and indirect costs, may affect their outcomes. While some guidelines recommend inclusion of costs associated with productivity losses/gains, very little guidance is provided about the productivity elements to include and their calculation approach. Areas covered: We conducted a systematic review of CEAs for vaccines and vaccine programs published between 1 January 2010 and 19 November 2019 that included productivity costs using Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. The kind of productivity elements included their calculation approach, and the impact of their inclusion on cost-effectiveness are summarized. Among 88 studies identified, productivity elements included were reported for 71 studies (81%) with absenteeism being the most commonly included element. Only 24 studies (27%) reported the approach used to calculate productivity costs (human capital vs. friction approach). Most studies (81%) reported a more favorable cost-effectiveness with the inclusion of productivity losses/gains. Expert opinion: Inclusion of productivity losses/gains for CEAs for vaccines has resulted in more favorable cost-effectiveness based on the studies reviewed. However, clearer guidance on the productivity elements to include by disease area and more transparency on the calculation method used may be needed.Funding Information
- Pfizer Japan Inc
This publication has 31 references indexed in Scilit:
- Cost-Effectiveness of Lapatinib plus Letrozole in her2-Positive, Hormone Receptor–Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer in CanadaCurrent Oncology, 2013
- Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statementBMJ, 2013
- Cost-effectiveness and economic benefits of vaccines in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic reviewVaccine, 2012
- The Cost Effectiveness of Human Papillomavirus VaccinesDrugs, 2012
- 1. Issues on Estimating Costs in Economic EvaluationJapanese Journal of Pharmacoepidemiology/Yakuzai ekigaku, 2012
- Do Productivity Costs Matter?PharmacoEconomics, 2011
- The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and ElaborationPLoS Medicine, 2009
- Ten arguments for a societal perspective in the economic evaluation of medical innovationsThe European Journal of Health Economics, 2009
- MEASURING COSTS IN COST-UTILITY ANALYSESInternational Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 2000