Clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in South Africa

Abstract

Low- and middle-income countries are implementing COVID-19 vaccination strategies in light of varying vaccine efficacies and costs, supply shortages, and resource constraints. Here, we use a microsimulation model to evaluate clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of a COVID-19 vaccination program in South Africa. We varied vaccination coverage, pace, acceptance, effectiveness, and cost as well as epidemic dynamics. Providing vaccines to at least 40% of the population and prioritizing vaccine rollout prevented >9 million infections and >73,000 deaths and reduced costs due to fewer hospitalizations. Model results were most sensitive to assumptions about epidemic growth and prevalence of prior immunity to SARS-CoV-2, though the vaccination program still provided high value and decreased both deaths and health care costs across a wide range of assumptions. Vaccination program implementation factors, including prompt procurement, distribution, and rollout, are likely more influential than characteristics of the vaccine itself in maximizing public health benefits and economic efficiency.

Keywords: COVID-19; South Africa; cost-effectiveness; resource allocation; vaccination.

Figure 1.. One-way sensitivity analysis, influence of each parameter on cumulative SARS-CoV-2 infections, COVID-19 deaths, and health care costs.

This tornado diagram demonstrates the relative influence of varying each key model parameter on clinical and economic outcomes over 360 days. This is intended to reflect the different scenarios in which a reference vaccination program (vaccine supply sufficient for 67% of South Africa’s population, pace 150,000 vaccinations per day) might be implemented. The dashed line represents the base case scenario for each parameter. Each parameter is listed on the vertical axis, and in parentheses are the base case value and, after a colon, the range examined. The number on the left of the range represents the left-most part of the corresponding bar, and the number on the right of the range represents the right-most part of the corresponding bar. The horizontal axis shows the following outcomes of a reference vaccination program: (a) cumulative SARS-CoV-2 infections; (b) cumulative COVID-19 deaths; (c) cumulative health care costs. In some analyses, the lowest or highest value of an examined parameter produced a result that fell in the middle of the displayed range of results, due to stochastic variability when the range of results was narrow.

Figure 2.. Multi-way sensitivity analysis of vaccine effectiveness against infection and vaccination cost: incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of vaccination program compared with no vaccination.

Each box in the 4×4 plot is colored according to the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). The lightest color represents scenarios in which a reference vaccination program (vaccine supply sufficient for 67% of South Africa’s population, pace 150,000 vaccinations per day) is cost-saving compared with no vaccination program, meaning that it results in clinical benefit and reduces overall health care costs. The darker colors reflect increasing ICERs, whereby a reference vaccination program, compared with no vaccination program, results in both clinical benefit and higher overall health care costs. The ICER is the model-generated difference in costs divided by the difference in years-of-life between a reference vaccination program and no vaccination program. In none of these scenarios is the ICER above $2,000/year-of-life saved (YLS).