These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
Pubmed for Handhelds
PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS
Search MEDLINE/PubMed
Title: The economic value of childhood varicella vaccination in France and Germany. Author: Coudeville L, Brunot A, Szucs TD, Dervaux B. Journal: Value Health; 2005; 8(3):209-22. PubMed ID: 15877593. Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To determine the economic impact of childhood varicella vaccination in France and Germany. METHODS: A common methodology based on the use of a varicella transmission model was used for the two countries. Cost data (2002 per thousand) were derived from two previous studies. The analysis focused on a routine vaccination program for which three different coverage rates (CRs) were considered (90%, 70%, and 45%). Catch-up strategies were also analyzed. A societal perspective including both direct and indirect costs and a third-party payer perspective were considered (Social Security in France and Sickness Funds in Germany). RESULTS: A routine vaccination program has a clear positive impact on varicella-related morbidity in both countries. With a 90% CR, the number of varicella-related deaths was reduced by 87% in Germany and by 84% in France. In addition, with a CR of 90%, routine varicella vaccination induces savings in both countries from both societal (Germany 61%, France 60%) and third-party payer perspectives (Germany 51%, France 6.7%). For lower CRs, routine vaccination remains cost saving from a third-party payer perspective in Germany but not in France, where it is nevertheless cost-effective (cost per life-year gained of 6521 per thousand in the base case with a 45% CR). CONCLUSION: Considering the impact of vaccination on varicella morbidity and costs, a routine varicella vaccination program appears to be cost saving in Germany and France from both a societal and a third-party payer perspective. For France, routine varicella vaccination remains cost-effective in worst cases when a third-party payer perspective is adopted. Catch-up programs provide additional savings.[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]