¿Cuál es el verdadero coste de incluir la vacuna 4CMenB (Bexsero) en el calendario infantil?

The cost of generating a quality-adjusted life year (QALY) within a National Health Service provides an approximation of the average opportunity cost of funding decisions. This information can be used to inform a cost-effectiveness threshold. The aim of this paper is to estimate the cost per QALY at the Spanish National Health Service. We exploit variation across 17 regional health services and the exogenous changes in expenditure that took place as a consequence of the economic crisis over 5 years of data. We conduct fixed effect models and use an instrumental variable approach to test for potential remaining endogeneity. Our results show that health expenditure has a positive and significant effect on population health, with an average spending elasticity of 0.07. This translates into a cost per QALY of between 22,000€ and 25,000€. These values are below the cost-effectiveness threshold figure of 30,000€ commonly cited in Spain.

In most societies resources are insufficient to provide everyone with all the health care they want. In practice, this means that some people are given priority over others. On what basis should priority be given? In this paper we are interested in the general public's views on this question. We set out to synthesis what the literature has found as a whole regarding which attributes or factors the general public think should count in priority setting and what weight they should receive. A systematic review was undertaken (in August 2014) to address these questions based on empirical studies that elicited stated preferences from the general public. Sixty four studies, applying eight methods, spanning five continents met the inclusion criteria. Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) and Person Trade-off (PTO) were the most popular standard methods for preference elicitation, but only 34% of all studies calculated distributional weights, mainly using PTO. While there is heterogeneity, results suggest the young are favoured over the old, the more severely ill are favoured over the less severely ill, and people with self-induced illness or high socioeconomic status tend to receive lower priority. In those studies that considered health gain, larger gain is universally preferred, but at a diminishing rate. Evidence from the small number of studies that explored preferences over different components of health gain suggests life extension is favoured over quality of life enhancement; however this may be reversed at the end of life. The majority of studies that investigated end of life care found weak/no support for providing a premium for such care. The review highlights considerable heterogeneity in both methods and results. Further methodological work is needed to achieve the goal of deriving robust distributional weights for use in health care priority setting.

Resumen Introducción Bexsero® (4CMenB), vacuna contra el meningococo B, fue autorizada en Europa en 2013. En España, a pesar de que el meningococo B es la principal causa de enfermedad meningocócica invasiva (EMI), Bexsero® está recomendada y financiada para pacientes con alto riesgo de EMI pero no de forma sistemática en el calendario vacunal del SNS. Objetivo Evaluar el coste-utilidad, el impacto epidemiológico y los costes totales de la introducción de 4CMenB para una política vacunal informada en España. Método Se adaptó para España un análisis de coste-utilidad, árbol de decisión probabilístico. Una cohorte de recién nacidos en 2015 fue modelizada con dos posologías mediante dos estrategias: vacunación sistemática con 4CMenB o no vacunación. Los costes se midieron desde la perspectiva del pagador y los beneficios se calcularon en años de vida ajustados por calidad (AVAC). Se realizó un análisis de Monte Carlo y se consideraron 32 escenarios para valorar la robustez y la incertidumbre de los resultados. Resultados Con la pauta 3+1, la vacunación sistemática previno el 54% de los casos y de las muertes, y se estimó una razón de coste-utilidad incremental (RCUI) de 351.389 €/AVAC (intervalo de confianza del 95% [IC95%]: 265.193-538.428). La pauta 2+1 previno el 50% de los casos y de las muertes, con una RCUI de 278.556 €/AVAC (IC95%: 210.285-430.122). Conclusiones Dada la incidencia actual de enfermedad meningocócica invasiva en España y la información disponible sobre 4CMenB, nuestro modelo indica que la vacunación sistemática no es coste-efectiva con el actual precio. Solo con un precio de 1,45 € para la pauta 3+1 o de 3,37 € para la pauta 2+1 podría ser recomendada basándose en su eficiencia.