Suppose a new influenza vaccine is developed and health officials are deciding a
ID: 126241 • Letter: S
Question
Suppose a new influenza vaccine is developed and health officials are deciding about what do in terms of usage. Lets say the vaccine would be administered to 100,000 folks over the age of 65. The costs are $50 per dose. It is believed that it will save 1000 folks from getting the flu at all and that there would be 50 adverse reaction cases. Assume the cost of dealing with the flu is $300 and the cost of dealing with adverse reaction is $1000. 1) So, find the costs and benefits and compare what is our decision rule? Do you think they should mandate vaccinations (at this point)? Ok, suppose that 1/100 folks who get the flu (in this age group) would die from it. So, if flu prevented, assume they live an additional 8 healthy years Now, what is our retum per dollar spent? What makes sense to you?Explanation / Answer
The answer to question 1:
Step 1: Calculating total vaccination cost:
Cost per dose of vaccine: $50
Total number of people vaccine would be administered is 100,000
Benefits of vaccination: save 1000 folks from getting the flu.
Now, the total cost incurred for vaccination is: $50 x 100,000 = $5,000,000
Step 2: Calculating the expenditure for complications associated with vaccination:
Cost incurred for dealing flu per case is $300
Total number of cases with adverse reactions is 50
Total cost incurred for managing flu and complications of vaccination is: $300 x 50 = $15,000
Step 3: Calculating the total expenditure associated with vaccination:
Total health expenditure on vaccinating people = Total vaccination cost + Total cost for managing vaccination-related complications.
= $5,000,000 + $15,000 = $5,015,000
Total expenditure for this vaccination trial is $5,015,000
Finding the benefits of flu vaccination:
The total benefit arising from this vaccination trial is:
Comparison:
For $5,015,000 spent for influenza vaccination the actual number of people who actually get benefitted is around 1000 only [for 100,000 folks – 1,000 folks would be prevented and 50 have adverse effects].
That is $5015 spent per person for preventing flu.
Our decision:
In my opinion, it is a not suitable alternative for vaccination crowds with this new drug because compared to the cost spent, we have less benefit after managing the cost of vaccination and its adverse effects.
Therefore, as the vaccination does not benefit all people, mandating the vaccine is unbeneficial and hence should be avoided. We can make this vaccination as an optional one for those who really prefer it.
The answer to question 2:
1/100 folks who get flu at 65 year age group would die from it. If flu is prevented they live for another 8 years.
Assuming 100,000 folks in a community, the total number of people who have the possibility of getting flu is 1/100 x 100,000 = 1000 people per 100,000 population.
For $5,015,000 spent for influenza vaccination, we increase the life expectancy of 1000 folks by 8 years.
That is, $5,015,000/1000 = $5015 amount is spent per person for increasing preventing flu-related death and increasing his life expectancy by 8 years.
To simplify, 5015/8 = approximately $627 dollars is being spent on preventing flu-related deaths per person per year.
Therefore, the return on investment is $627 – that is for $627 spent we can prevent/postpone the flu-related death per person per year.
The cost incurred for dealing flu per case is $300.
It is evident that the cost associated with dealing flu per case [$300] is much cheaper than that of the cost associated with vaccinating the people [627].
In my opinion, it would be better to initiate other forms of preventive measures for prevention, early detection and diagnosis and treatment of flu and its related problems through health education, by conducting camps, etc. rather than proceeding with this trial drug.
Related Questions
drjack9650@gmail.com
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.