SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.69 issue4Extended spectrum beta-lactamase - positive Escherichia coli: resistanceAcute pericarditis in Combat Out Post (Afghanistan): when a simple diagnostic becomes complicate author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand

Journal

Article

Indicators

Related links

  • On index processCited by Google
  • Have no similar articlesSimilars in SciELO
  • On index processSimilars in Google

Share


Sanidad Militar

Print version ISSN 1887-8571

Abstract

SALINAS GRANELL, M.B.  and  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.  https://dx.doi.org/10.4321/S1887-85712013000400004.

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.

Keywords : Cost; Vaccination; Cellular immunity; Canine leishmaniasis; Armed Forces.

        · abstract in Spanish     · text in Spanish     · Spanish ( pdf )

 

Creative Commons License All the contents of this journal, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License