1 / 20

Kjell Arne Johansson Department of global and public health University of Bergen

Public finance of pneumococcal vaccine and pneumonia treatment in Ethiopia: - an extended cost-effectiveness analysis. Kjell Arne Johansson Department of global and public health University of Bergen Kjell.johansson@isf.uib.no Stephane Verguet Department of Global Health

alina
Télécharger la présentation

Kjell Arne Johansson Department of global and public health University of Bergen

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Public finance of pneumococcal vaccine and pneumonia treatment in Ethiopia: - an extended cost-effectiveness analysis Kjell Arne Johansson Department of global and public health University of Bergen Kjell.johansson@isf.uib.no StephaneVerguet Department of Global Health University of Washington

  2. Plan • Burdenofpneomococcaldisease and pneumonia in Ethiopia • Health benefitsacrossincomegroups • Costsofpublicfinance • Income equivalentequityweights • Private expendituresaverted • Financial protection

  3. Objective • To evaluate the expected financial protection and health gains of two publicly financed child health programs in Ethiopia, pneumonia treatment and pneumococcal vaccination • Averages will be spread across income groups

  4. BACKGROUND Diseaseburden and DEMAND

  5. Diseaseburden and incomedistribution in Ethiopia

  6. Utilizationofhealth services

  7. Total costsofpublicfinanceofbothinterventions (close to 40% coverage)

  8. per 1,000,000 US$: PCV (0.2 US$): 3010 PCV (3.5 US$): 540 Antibiotics:560 Deaths averted

  9. Income equivalenthealthgains- distributive weightsapplied Ref: FleurbaeyM et al. Health Econ. 2012

  10. Fair evaluationof PCV/antibiotics- incomeequivalentweightsapplied Equivalent lives saved per 1,000,000 US$: PCV (0.2 US$): 3010  3060 (2%) Antibiotics:560  660 (18%)

  11. Financial protection

  12. Household expendituresaverted per 1,000,000 US$: PCV: 180,000 US$ Antibiotics:160,000 US$

  13. Utilitycurve for financialprotection U(y) = (y^(1-r) / (1-r) Ref. Finkelstein A., McKnight R. Journal of Public Economics. 2008; McClellan M, Skinner J, Journal of Public Economics. 2006;

  14. Expectedvalueofincome E(y) = (1 - I0(y))y + I0(y) (y - Ctreatment) Expectedvalueofutility Eu(y) = (1 - I0(y))u(y) + I0(y) u(y - Ctreatment) Insurance value / certaintyequivalent V(y) = E(y) – u-1[Eu(y)]

  15. Financial risk protection

  16. Health gains & financialprotection- per $1M spent

  17. Expecteddistributionofhealthgains & financialprotection (per $1M spent)

  18. Summary • Health distribution PCV saves most lives. Equivalent health gains improves the expected utilities the most for pneumonia treatment by giving more weight to health benefits to the poor • Financial protection Pneumonia treatment improves financial protection the most, especially for the poor • Normative problem Save the most lives (PCV) vs. improving financial protection the most (pneumonia treatment)

More Related