Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses of dengue vaccination in Indonesia

Abstract

Despite the fact that the incidence and mortality rates due to dengue virus (DENV) infection in Indonesia are relatively high, dengue vaccination has not yet been introduced. This study aimed to analyse the cost-effectiveness and the budget impact of dengue vaccination in Indonesia by taking the potential of pre-vaccination screening into account. An age-structured decision tree model was developed to assess the cost-effectiveness value by applying a single cohort of 4,710,100 children that was followed-up in a 10-year time horizon within a 1-year analytical cycle. The budget impact was analysed in a 5-year period (2020-2024) by considering provinces' readiness to introduce dengue vaccine and their incidence rate of DENV infection in the last 10 years. Vaccination that was coupled with pre-vaccination screening would reduce dengue fever (DF), dengue haemorrhagic fever (DHF) and dengue shock syndrome (DSS) by 188,142, 148,089 and 426 cases, respectively. It would save treatment cost at $23,433,695 and $14,091,642 from the healthcare and payer perspective, respectively. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) would be $5,733 and $5,791 per quality-adjusted-life-year (QALY) gained from both perspectives. The most influential parameters affecting the ICERs were probability of DENV infection, vaccine efficacy, under-reporting factor, vaccine price, case fatality rate and screening cost. It can be concluded that dengue vaccination and pre-vaccination screening would be cost-effective to be implemented in Indonesia. Nevertheless, it seems unaffordable to be implemented since the total required cost for the nationwide vaccination would be 94.44% of routine immunization budget.

Fig 1. Decision tree model.

Fig 2. Number of averted cases due to vaccination and screening prior to vaccination (2020–2024).

Fig 3. Number of saved treatment cost due to vaccination and screening prior to vaccination (2020–2024).

Fig 4. One-way sensitivity analysis.

Fig 5. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves from the healthcare and payer perspective.

Fig 6. Affordability curves from the healthcare and payer perspective.