A Net Benefit Approach for the Optimal Allocation of a COVID-19 Vaccine

Erin Kirwin, Ellen Rafferty, Kate Harback, Jeff Round and Christopher McCabe
Additional contact information
Ellen Rafferty: Institute of Health Economics
Kate Harback: Institute of Health Economics
Jeff Round: Institute of Health Economics
Christopher McCabe: Institute of Health Economics

PharmacoEconomics, 2021, vol. 39, issue 9, No 6, 1059-1073

Abstract: Abstract Objective The objective of this study was to implement a model-based approach to identify the optimal allocation of a coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine in the province of Alberta, Canada. Methods We developed an epidemiologic model to evaluate allocation strategies defined by age and risk target groups, coverage, effectiveness and cost of vaccine. The model simulated hypothetical immunisation scenarios within a dynamic context, capturing concurrent public health strategies and population behavioural changes. Results In a scenario with 80% vaccine effectiveness, 40% population coverage and prioritisation of those over the age of 60 years at high risk of poor outcomes, active cases are reduced by 17% and net monetary benefit increased by $263 million dollars, relative to no vaccine. Concurrent implementation of policies such as school closure and senior contact reductions have similar impacts on incremental net monetary benefit ($352 vs $292 million, respectively) when there is no prioritisation given to any age or risk group. When older age groups are given priority, the relative benefit of school closures is much larger ($214 vs $118 million). Results demonstrate that the rank ordering of different prioritisation options varies by prioritisation criteria, vaccine effectiveness and coverage, and concurrently implemented policies. Conclusions Our results have three implications: (i) optimal vaccine allocation will depend on the public health policies in place at the time of allocation and the impact of those policies on population behaviour; (ii) outcomes of vaccine allocation policies can be greatly supported with interventions targeting contact reduction in critical sub-populations; and (iii) identification of the optimal strategy depends on which outcomes are prioritised.

Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-021-01037-2 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

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:spr:pharme:v:39:y:2021:i:9:d:10.1007_s40273-021-01037-2

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40273

DOI: 10.1007/s40273-021-01037-2

Access Statistics for this article

PharmacoEconomics is currently edited by Timothy Wrightson and Christopher I. Carswell

More articles in PharmacoEconomics from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().