Comparing 3 Approaches for Making Vaccine Adoption Decisions in Thailand.

Health Technology Assessment Priority Setting Thailand Universal Health Coverage Vaccine

Journal

International journal of health policy and management
ISSN: 2322-5939
Titre abrégé: Int J Health Policy Manag
Pays: Iran
ID NLM: 101619905

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 10 2020
Historique:
received: 10 05 2019
accepted: 01 01 2020
pubmed: 3 7 2020
medline: 18 9 2021
entrez: 3 7 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The World Health Organization (WHO) has developed the Total System Effectiveness (TSE) framework to assist national policy-makers in prioritizing vaccines. The pilot was launched in Thailand to explore the potential use of TSE in a country with established governance structures and accountable decision-making processes for immunization policy. While the existing literature informs vaccine adoption decisions in GAVI-eligible countries, this study attempts to address a gap in the literature by examining the policy process of a non-GAVI eligible country. A rotavirus vaccine (RVV) test case was used to compare the decision criteria made by the existing processes (Expanded Program on Immunization [EPI], and National List of Essential Medicines [NLEM]) for vaccine prioritization and the TSE-pilot model, using Thailand specific data. The existing decision-making processes in Thailand and TSE were found to offer similar recommendations on the selection of a RVV product. The authors believe that TSE can provide a well-reasoned and step by step approach for countries, especially low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), to develop a systematic and transparent decision-making process for immunization policy.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
The World Health Organization (WHO) has developed the Total System Effectiveness (TSE) framework to assist national policy-makers in prioritizing vaccines. The pilot was launched in Thailand to explore the potential use of TSE in a country with established governance structures and accountable decision-making processes for immunization policy. While the existing literature informs vaccine adoption decisions in GAVI-eligible countries, this study attempts to address a gap in the literature by examining the policy process of a non-GAVI eligible country.
METHODS
A rotavirus vaccine (RVV) test case was used to compare the decision criteria made by the existing processes (Expanded Program on Immunization [EPI], and National List of Essential Medicines [NLEM]) for vaccine prioritization and the TSE-pilot model, using Thailand specific data.
RESULTS
The existing decision-making processes in Thailand and TSE were found to offer similar recommendations on the selection of a RVV product.
CONCLUSION
The authors believe that TSE can provide a well-reasoned and step by step approach for countries, especially low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), to develop a systematic and transparent decision-making process for immunization policy.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32610741
doi: 10.15171/ijhpm.2020.01
pmc: PMC7719214
doi:

Substances chimiques

Vaccines 0

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

439-447

Subventions

Organisme : World Health Organization
ID : 001
Pays : International

Informations de copyright

© 2020 The Author(s); Published by Kerman University of Medical Sciences. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Auteurs

Waranya Rattanavipapong (W)

Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program (HITAP), Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand.

Ritika Kapoor (R)

Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.

Yot Teerawattananon (Y)

Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program (HITAP), Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand.
Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.

Jos Luttjeboer (J)

Asc Academics, Groningen, The Netherlands.

Siobhan Botwright (S)

World Health Organization (WHO), Genève, Switzerland.

Rachel A Archer (RA)

Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program (HITAP), Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand.

Birgitte Giersing (B)

World Health Organization (WHO), Genève, Switzerland.

Raymond C W Hutubessy (RCW)

World Health Organization (WHO), Genève, Switzerland.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH