Live or inactivated poliomyelitis vaccine: An analysis of benefits and risks

A.R. Hinman, J.P. Koplan, W.A. Orenstein, E.W. Brink and B.M. Nkowane

American Journal of Public Health, 1988, vol. 78, issue 3, 291-295

Abstract: Using decision analysis we evaluated the benefits and risks of continued primary reliance on oral poliomyelitis vaccine (OPV) compared to use of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV). We followed a hypothetical cohort of 3.5 million children from birth to age 30 assuming 95 per cent coverage with 98 per cent effective vaccine. Primary reliance on IPV would result in more cases of paralytic poliomyelitis as well as more susceptibles remaining in the population than would be expected with continuing OPV use (74.1 vs 10.0 cases and 5.9 per cent vs 1.1 per cent susceptibles, respectively). However, with OPV use, most cases of paralysis seen would be associated with the vaccine. Our analysis supports a continuation of current US policy primary reliance on OPV but the conclusion is heavily dependent on assumptions of risk of exposure to wild virus in the United States. Major declines in risk of exposure to wild virus could alter the balance significantly.

Date: 1988
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1988:78:3:291-295_2

Access Statistics for this article

American Journal of Public Health is currently edited by Alfredo Morabia

More articles in American Journal of Public Health from American Public Health Association
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Christopher F Baum ().