Barnum H N, Tarantola D, Setiady I F
Bull World Health Organ. 1980;58(3):499-503.
The economic analysis reported below, based on hypothetical estimates of the programme impact, indicates that an expanded programme of immunization for diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, and tuberculosis can be expected to be highly cost-effective in comparison with treatment. Sensitivity tests illustrate that this conclusion remains valid even when costs are increased by 20% and benefits reduced by 50%. A separate analysis was made of the DPT-tetanus toxoid and BCG components of the programme. The analysis revealed that although the BCG programme may not be justifiable when operated independently, its inclusion in a joint immunization programme is strongly justifiable on economic grounds (assuming a vaccine efficacy of 0.5). This result confirms one of the basic arguments advanced for the WHO programmes of expanded immunization and illustrates that other immunizations, such as for poliomyelitis and measles, which may not be cost-efficient by themselves may be economically justifiable when included as part of a larger immunization programme.
以下基于对该计划影响的假设性估计所做的经济分析表明,与治疗相比,扩大白喉、百日咳、破伤风和结核病免疫计划有望具有很高的成本效益。敏感性测试表明,即使成本增加20%且效益降低50%,这一结论仍然有效。对该计划中的白百破-破伤风类毒素和卡介苗部分进行了单独分析。分析表明,虽然卡介苗计划单独实施时可能不合理,但从经济角度考虑,将其纳入联合免疫计划是非常合理的(假设疫苗效力为0.5)。这一结果证实了为世界卫生组织扩大免疫计划提出的基本论点之一,并表明其他免疫接种,如脊髓灰质炎和麻疹免疫接种,其本身可能不具有成本效益,但作为更大规模免疫计划的一部分时在经济上可能是合理的。