Abstract:
To formulate indications for the use of hepatitis B vaccine, we examined the cost effectiveness of three strategies: vaccinating everyone; screening everyone and vaccinating those without evidence of immunity; and neither vaccinating nor screening, but passively immunizing those with known exposure. Estimates of the hepatitis attack rate, prevalence of immunity, and frequency of known exposure were made for three representative populations: homosexual men, surgical residents, and the general population of the United States. Screening followed by vaccination of homosexual men and vaccination without prior screening of surgical residents would result in savings of medical costs. Neither screening nor vaccination is the lowest-cost strategy for the general population. Vaccination of susceptible persons will save medical costs for populations with annual attack rates above 5 per cent. Vaccination may be considered cost effective (or cost saving when indirect costs are included) for populations with attack rates as low as 1 to 2 per cent.
Keywords: Cost-Benefit Analysis Hepatitis B/ECONOMICS/IMMUNOLOGY/*PREVENTION & CONTROL Hepatitis B Virus/*IMMUNOLOGY Homosexuality Human Immunity, Natural Immunization, Passive Internship and Residency Male Models, Biological Risk Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Surgery United States Vaccination/*ECONOMICS Viral Vaccines/*ADMINISTRATION & DOSAGE JOURNAL ARTICLE
AEGiS presents published material, reprinted with permission and neither endorses nor opposes any material. All information contained on this website, including information relating to health conditions, products, and treatments, is for informational purposes only. It is often presented in summary or aggregate form. It is not meant to be a substitute for the advice provided by your own physician or other medical professionals. Always discuss treatment options with a doctor who specializes in treating HIV.