Why the study?
This study was conducted to evaluate the health economics of enterovirus 71 (EV71) vaccination for the population of appropriate age in Guangdong Province.
Is EV71 vaccination cost-effective in reducing the incidence and economic burden of HFMD in children under school age in Guangdong Province?
Is EV71 vaccination cost-effective in reducing the incidence and economic burden of HFMD in children under school age in Guangdong Province?
EV71 vaccination effectively reduces the incidence and economic burden of HFMD, though current vaccine pricing is only cost-effective if the price is below $13.15.
May support EV71 vaccination programs in high-burden regions if priced affordably; leaves open generalizability pending real-world validation.
Background: This study aims to evaluate the health economics of hand-foot-mouth disease enterovirus 71 (EV71) vaccination for the population of appropriate age in Guangdong Province. Methods: ) of this disease was simulated. Then, the incidence of HFMD under different vaccination coverage rate (0, 40, 70, and 90%) was simulated in four scenarios. Cost-effectiveness analysis was used to evaluate the health economics. Results: The self-funded voluntary EV71 vaccination strategy implemented in Guangdong Province has effectively reduced the disease economic burden of EV71-type HFMD, and the disease economic burden saved during the peak seasonal segment of HFMD in 2017 was $1,080,000. Meanwhile, Scenario 2, 3, and 4 would each result in a cumulative reduction of 6,525, 9,556, and 10,989 confirmed cases, respectively, with net monetary benefits of approximately $6.55 million, $9.59 million, and $11.2 million. The study results show that the current vaccine pricing is not cost-effectiveness, while the vaccine price is lower than $13.15, EV71 vaccination in Guangdong Province has a cost-effectiveness advantage. Conclusion: Vaccination can reduce the incidence of HFMD caused by EV71, which helps to improve the status of HFMD and decreases the disease burden.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhang et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: