SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

vol.69 número4Escherichia coli portador de betalactamasas de espectro extendido: resistenciaPericarditis aguda en Puesto Avanzado de Combate (Afganistán): cuando un diagnóstico sencillo se convierte en complicado índice de autoresíndice de materiabúsqueda de artículos
Home Pagelista alfabética de revistas  

Servicios Personalizados




Links relacionados

  • En proceso de indezaciónCitado por Google
  • No hay articulos similaresSimilares en SciELO
  • En proceso de indezaciónSimilares en Google


Sanidad Militar

versión impresa ISSN 1887-8571


SALINAS GRANELL, M.B.  y  TABANERA DE LUCIO, A.. Cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analysis of the new immunization alternatives for the prevention of canine leishmaniasis in the Armed Forces. Sanid. Mil. [online]. 2013, vol.69, n.4, pp.249-256. ISSN 1887-8571.

Antecedents and objectives: Epidemiological studies and cost analysis methods are first-rate tools in the Medical Service. They allow to optimize the available resources and structures, maintaining efficacy and effectiveness in the fight against diseases, one of them the leishmaniasis. Field epidemiology is a useful tool to reach our health strategic goal of controlling this disease. Canine leishmaniasis is one the most important parasitic diseases in the Armed Forces, both from the point of view of public health and the operational capacity of our military working dogs. This study intends to compare the cost-benefit (C-B) of two types of vaccines with the costs of outsourcing the services. In order to do this the cost- effectiveness (C-E) of expanding the current immunization calendar, including a new vaccine against LI (CaniLeish®) and the cost-effectiveness (C-E) of expanding the current vector control program with the acquisition of a new preventive drug against LI (Leisguard ®), are evaluated. Material and Method: the efficiency of expanding the existing preventive program with the new immunization alternatives (vaccination and the use of domperidone) appeared in the market against canine leishmaniasis, has been studied through a cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness evaluation, taking into account the current seroprevalence. An adequate monetary valuation of the impact on health of the studied alternatives is required. Results: The overall costs of both alternatives are higher than the cost of the treatment of the disease, with negative cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness relationships (in terms of cost per operational maintenance of the dogs), that is, there are no net savings. Conclusions: From the results obtained with these analytical techniques we conclude that the alternative resources are not more efficient that the current activities. In this case, any new preventive measure must be considered in the medium / short term and always bearing in mind the epidemiological changes of the disease concerned.

Palabras clave : Cost; Vaccination; Cellular immunity; Canine leishmaniasis; Armed Forces.

        · resumen en Español     · texto en Español     · Español ( pdf )


Creative Commons License Todo el contenido de esta revista, excepto dónde está identificado, está bajo una Licencia Creative Commons