河南省两种麻疹免疫策略的成本-效果分析  

Cost effectiveness analysis on two different measles immunization strategies

作　　者：吴红宇[1] 王克安[1] 张兴录[1] 金水高[2] 冯子健[3] 

机构地区：[1]中国预防医学科学院计划免疫中心,北京100050 [2]中国预防医学科学院统计室,北京100050 [3]河南省卫生防疫站

出　　处：《中华流行病学杂志》2000年第2期121-123,共3页Chinese Journal of Epidemiology

摘　　要：目的　以河南省人口、经济和麻疹流行病学资料为基础 ,从经济学角度对强化免疫策略与两剂免疫策略进行比较和评价。方法　采用卫生经济学中成本 -效果分析方法 ,时间区间为1997～ 2 0 2 0年 ,效果指标为失能调整寿命损失年 (disabilityadjustedlifeyears,DALY) ,成本 -效果比(cost-effectivenessratio ,CER) =强化免疫策略与两剂免疫策略的费用差 /强化免疫策略与两剂免疫策略的效果差。结果　随年份的增长 ,CER呈下降趋势 ,从 2 0 13年起强化免疫策略有正效益。结论　强化免疫策略不仅在降低麻疹发病、阻断麻疹传播方面有很好的效果 。Objective To seek the most economic and effective strategy in measles elimination in China, data of cost-effectiveness was analyzed to compare two different strategies of measles immunization (mass campaign and 2-dose schedule) based on the data of population,economy and epidemiological features of measles in Henan province. Methods DALY was used as the measurement of effectiveness. Taking period from 1997 to 2020, the cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) was defined as the cost difference between mass campaign and 2-dose schedule divided by the decline of DALYs if 2-dose schedule had been substituted by mass campaign. Results Along with the increment of time, CER showed a descending trend then the mass campaign will have positive benefits after year 2013. Conclusion Mass campaign is more cost-effective than 2-dose schedule.

关 键 词：麻疹 免疫策略 成本-效果比 河南 

分 类 号：R186[医药卫生—流行病学]