Table 4

Annual results of universal and targeted RV vaccination compared to no vaccination under base-case assumptions
RV disease burden (95% CI)a   RV disease costsa (€ million) Vaccination costs (€ million)
Disease episodes (x1000) Hospitalizationsb Fatal cases QALY’s lost (undiscounted) Direct healthcare costs (undiscounted) Societal costs (undiscounted) (undiscounted)
No vaccination 74.1(57.8; 90.0) 4,870 (4,310; 5,430) 6.5 (3.2; 11.0) 257 (136; 422) 11.9 (10.5; 13.3) 18.2 (16.2; 20.3) -
Targeted RV vaccination
RV1 67.3 (51.3; 82.4) 4,370 (3,890; 4,870) 0.7(0.2; 1.6) 119 (79; 177) 10.5 (9.3; 11.8) 16.4 (14.6; 18.2) 1.5
 Percent reduction 8% 10% 89% 54% 12% 10%
RV5 67.4 (51.5; 82.7) 4,384 (3,892; 4,870) 0.8 (0.3; 1.7) 121 (80; 184) 10.6 (9.4; 11.8) 16.4 (14.6; 18.2) 1.6
 Percent reduction 8% 10% 88% 53% 11% 10%
Universal RV vaccination
RV1 40.6 (30.1; 51.2) 1,370 (1,150; 1,650) 0.4 (0.2; 0.8) 60 (42; 81) 3.4 (2 8; 4 1) 5.9 (5.0; 6.9) 15.2
 Percent reduction 45% 72% 94% 77% 71% 67%
RV5 42.6 (31.7; 53.6) 1,440 (1,210; 1,710) 0.5(0.2; 0.9) 66 (45; 91) 3.6 (3.1; 4.3) 6.3 (5.3; 7.3) 16.7
 Percent reduction 43% 70% 92% 75% 70% 65%

aResults reflect those five years and more after initial implementation of a vaccination strategy when steady state is reached; bincluding nosocomial infections. CI:confidence interval; QALY:quality-adjusted life year; RV: rotavirus.

Bruijning-Verhagen et al.

Bruijning-Verhagen et al. BMC Medicine 2013 11:112   doi:10.1186/1741-7015-11-112

Open Data