Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: Journal of Medical Internet Research

Date Submitted: Jan 4, 2023
Date Accepted: Apr 14, 2023

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Digital Health Technology for Improving the Uptake of Vaccination Programs: Systematic Review

Wang Y, Fekadu G, You JHs

Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Digital Health Technology for Improving the Uptake of Vaccination Programs: Systematic Review

J Med Internet Res 2023;25:e45493

DOI: 10.2196/45493

PMID: 37184916

PMCID: 10227707

Cost-effectiveness analyses of digital health technology for improving the uptake of vaccination programs: A systematic review

  • Yingcheng Wang; 
  • Ginenus Fekadu; 
  • Joyce Hoi-sze You

ABSTRACT

Background:

Vaccination is the most effective strategy to prevent infectious diseases, yet vaccination coverage has not reached the target level. To promote the vaccination uptake, digital health interventions (DHIs) have been used in various vaccination programs.

Objective:

This study aimed to perform a systematic review of the cost-effectiveness analyses of DHIs for improving the uptake of vaccination programs.

Methods:

A literature review was conducted in Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), APA PsycINFO (Ovid), Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL Ultimate (EBSCOhost), Center for Review and Dissemination, and Institute for IEEE Xplore up to October 2022. Health economic evaluations that met the following inclusion criteria were included: (1) adult or pediatric vaccination programs; (2) interventions were delivered via digital technology; (3) full-scale health economic analyses including cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, cost-benefit or cost-consequence analyses; and (4) analyses conducted by model-based or trial-based. The quality of each included study was evaluated using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards.

Results:

The systematic review included seven studies in total. Four of the cost-effectiveness analyses were conducted by modeling, and three were trial-based analyses. One study reported the additional cost per quality-adjusted life years gained, while six studies reported the additional cost per individual vaccinated (or return case). The vaccines targeted the human papillomavirus vaccine, influenza vaccination, measles-mumps-rubella vaccine, and children immunization at different ages. The DHIs were distributed via television campaign, web-based decision aid, short messaging service, telephone, and computer-generated recall letters. The studies were classified as very good (n=5) and good (n=2) quality. One study concluded that the DHI was cost-saving, and six studies concluded that the DHI was cost-effective.

Conclusions:

This study is the first systematic review on cost-effectiveness analyses of DHIs to improve the vaccination uptake. All included studies have good to very good quality on study assessment, and reported the DHIs to be cost-saving to cost-effective in improving vaccination uptake.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Wang Y, Fekadu G, You JHs

Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Digital Health Technology for Improving the Uptake of Vaccination Programs: Systematic Review

J Med Internet Res 2023;25:e45493

DOI: 10.2196/45493

PMID: 37184916

PMCID: 10227707

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.