Abstract

Objectives

Our study compares two national COVID-19 vaccination plan strategies—high-risk prioritization and no prioritization—and estimates their cost-effectiveness compared with no vaccination, to generate possible recommendations for future vaccination plans.

Methods

We developed a Markov discrete-time, compartmental, deterministic model stratified by Colombian departments, healthcare workers, comorbidities, and age groups and calibrated to seroprevalence, cases, and deaths. The model simulates three scenarios: no vaccination, no prioritization of vaccination, and prioritization of high-risk population. The study presents the perspective of the health system of Colombia, including the direct health costs financed by the government and the direct health outcomes related to the infection. We measured symptomatic cases, deaths, and costs for each of the three scenarios from the start of the vaccination rollout to February 20, 2023.

Results

Both for the base-case and across multiple sensitivity analyses, the high-risk prioritization proves to be the most cost-effective of the considered strategies. An increment of US$255 million results in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of US$3339 per disability-adjusted life-year avoided. The simulations show that prioritization of high-risk population reduces symptomatic cases by 3.4% and deaths by 20.1% compared with no vaccination. The no-prioritization strategy is still cost-effective, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of US$5223.66, but the sensitivity analysis the show potential risks of losing cost-effectiveness under the cost-effectiveness threshold (one gross domestic product per averted disability-adjusted life-year).

Conclusions

The high-risk prioritization strategy is consistently more cost-effective than the no-prioritization strategy across multiple scenarios. High-risk prioritization is the recommended strategy in low-resource settings to reduce the burden of disease.