The Socioeconomic Value of Adult Respiratory Immunization Programs in Spain: How Much Can We Gain From Expanding Prevention Efforts?
Author(s)
Matthew William Napier, MSc1, Alejandra López-Ibáñez de Aldecoa, MBA, MSc, PhD2, Simon Brassel, MSc1, Yolanda Moreno, MSc2, Claud Theakston, MSc1, Francisco Jesus Mesa, MSc2, Jingyan Yang, DrPH3, Jeffrey Vietri, BA, MS, PhD4, Diana Mendes, PhD5, Tianyan Hu, PhD3, Lotte Steuten, MSc, PhD1.
1Office of Health Economics, London, United Kingdom, 2Pfizer, Madrid, Spain, 3Pfizer, New York, NY, USA, 4Pfizer, Collegeville, PA, USA, 5Pfizer, Tadworth, United Kingdom.
1Office of Health Economics, London, United Kingdom, 2Pfizer, Madrid, Spain, 3Pfizer, New York, NY, USA, 4Pfizer, Collegeville, PA, USA, 5Pfizer, Tadworth, United Kingdom.
Presentation Documents
OBJECTIVES: Respiratory illness due to pneumococcal disease (PD), respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), seasonal influenza, and COVID-19 represents a substantial socioeconomic burden in Spain. Although vaccines against all four diseases are available, only PD, flu, and COVID-19 vaccines are recommended under the National Immunisation Program (NIP) and yet, coverage remains below WHO-recommended levels.
METHODS: Four static, deterministic disease models were developed to estimate fatal, non-fatal cases, and work productivity loss prevented by each programme, compared to no vaccination.
Benefits follow an established Benefit Cost Analysis framework, which categorises monetised outcomes into reductions of 1) mortality risk, 2) morbidity risk, and 3) work productivity loss. Value of mortality reduction was monetised either using a value of a statistical life (VSL) approach or a value of a statistical life year (VSLY). Value of morbidity risk reduction was monetised using a cost-of-illness approach.
Benefit-Cost Ratios (BCRs) and net benefits (NBs) were calculated by aggregating results across all cohorts and programmes. These were assessed under four increasingly comprehensive scenarios: (1) current age-based NIP recommendations; (2) inclusion of RSV vaccination; (3) inclusion of risk-group recommendations; and (4) achievement of aspirational (75%) coverage across all populations. Additional outcomes were estimated including reduction in outpatient visits, hospitalization, and medical costs.
RESULTS: Lifetime BCR of the age-based adult immunisation programmes is 1.36:1 (VSLY) to 5.39:1 (VSL). This corresponds to estimated NBs of €3.93B (VSLY) / €48.60B (VSL), and the prevention of 255,885 hospitalised cases, and 84,097 outpatient visits. Incremental expansions—adding RSV vaccination, extending to risk groups, and achieving aspirational coverage—increase NBs compared to status quo by 40%/13%, 41%/17%, and 58%/46%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Adult respiratory immunisation delivers substantial socioeconomic value relative to its investment. Expanding the NIP to support more vaccine programmes and increasing coverage would unlock significant value for the population health, healthcare system and the economy.
METHODS: Four static, deterministic disease models were developed to estimate fatal, non-fatal cases, and work productivity loss prevented by each programme, compared to no vaccination.
Benefits follow an established Benefit Cost Analysis framework, which categorises monetised outcomes into reductions of 1) mortality risk, 2) morbidity risk, and 3) work productivity loss. Value of mortality reduction was monetised either using a value of a statistical life (VSL) approach or a value of a statistical life year (VSLY). Value of morbidity risk reduction was monetised using a cost-of-illness approach.
Benefit-Cost Ratios (BCRs) and net benefits (NBs) were calculated by aggregating results across all cohorts and programmes. These were assessed under four increasingly comprehensive scenarios: (1) current age-based NIP recommendations; (2) inclusion of RSV vaccination; (3) inclusion of risk-group recommendations; and (4) achievement of aspirational (75%) coverage across all populations. Additional outcomes were estimated including reduction in outpatient visits, hospitalization, and medical costs.
RESULTS: Lifetime BCR of the age-based adult immunisation programmes is 1.36:1 (VSLY) to 5.39:1 (VSL). This corresponds to estimated NBs of €3.93B (VSLY) / €48.60B (VSL), and the prevention of 255,885 hospitalised cases, and 84,097 outpatient visits. Incremental expansions—adding RSV vaccination, extending to risk groups, and achieving aspirational coverage—increase NBs compared to status quo by 40%/13%, 41%/17%, and 58%/46%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Adult respiratory immunisation delivers substantial socioeconomic value relative to its investment. Expanding the NIP to support more vaccine programmes and increasing coverage would unlock significant value for the population health, healthcare system and the economy.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2025-11, ISPOR Europe 2025, Glasgow, Scotland
Value in Health, Volume 28, Issue S2
Code
EE727
Topic
Economic Evaluation
Disease
Vaccines