Economic Analysis of a Child Vaccination Project Among Asian Americans in Philadelphia, Pa | Pediatrics | JAMA Pediatrics | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 34.204.186.91. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
Article
August 2001

Economic Analysis of a Child Vaccination Project Among Asian Americans in Philadelphia, Pa

Author Affiliations

From the National Immunization Program, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Public Health Service, US Department of Health and Human Services, Atlanta, Ga (Drs Deuson, Barker, Zhou, and Euler); and the Philadelphia Department of Public Health, Philadelphia, Pa (Ms Brodovicz). Dr Deuson is now with Merck & Co, Inc, Whitehouse Station, NJ; and Ms Brodovicz is now with Merck Research Laboratories, Blue Bell, Pa.

Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2001;155(8):909-914. doi:10.1001/archpedi.155.8.909
Abstract

Objective  To ascertain the cost-effectiveness and the benefit-cost ratios of a community-based hepatitis B vaccination catch-up project for Asian American children conducted in Philadelphia, Pa, from October 1, 1994, to February 11, 1996.

Design  Program evaluation.

Setting  South and southwest districts of Philadelphia.

Participants  A total of 4384 Asian American children.

Interventions  Staff in the community-based organizations (1) educated parents about the hepatitis B vaccination, (2) enrolled physicians in the Vaccines for Children program, and (3) visited homes of children due for a vaccine dose. Staff in the Philadelphia Department of Public Health developed a computerized database; sent reminder letters for children due for a vaccine dose; and offered vaccinations in public clinics, health fairs, and homes.

Main Outcome Measures  The numbers of children having received 1, 2, or 3 doses of vaccine before and after the interventions; costs incurred by the Philadelphia Department of Public Health and the community-based organizations for design, education, and outreach activities; the cost of the vaccination; cost-effectiveness ratios for intermediate outcomes (ie, per child, per dose, per immunoequivalent patient, and per completed series); discounted cost per discounted year of life saved; and the benefit-cost ratio of the project.

Results  For the completed series of 3 doses, coverage increased by 12 percentage points at a total cost of $268 660 for design, education, outreach, and vaccination. Costs per child, per dose, and per completed series were $64, $119, and $537, respectively. The discounted cost per discounted year of life saved was $11 525, and 106 years of life were saved through this intervention. The benefit-cost ratio was 4.44:1.

Conclusion  Although the increase in coverage was modest, the intervention proved cost-effective and cost-beneficial.

×