OBJECTIVE: To estimate the clinical and economic implications of community pharmacy-based herpes zoster (HZ) vaccination services with a hypothetical scenario of non-pharmacy-based vaccination in the State of Utah.
METHODS: A hybrid model of decision tree and Markov models was used to estimate lifetime cost and health outcomes. This open-cohort model was populated based on Utah population statistics and included a population of 50 years and above who were eligible for HZ vaccination between the years 2010 and 2020. Data were derived from the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Utah Immunization Coverage Report, the CDC Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, the CDC National Health Interview Survey, and existing literature. The analysis was performed from a societal perspective. A lifetime time horizon was used. The primary outcomes were the number of vaccination cases increased, and the number of shingles and postherpetic neuralgia (PHN) cases averted. Total costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were also estimated.
RESULTS: Based on a cohort of 853,550 people eligible for HZ vaccination in Utah, an additional 11,576 individuals were vaccinated in the community pharmacy-based scenario compared to the non-pharmacy-based vaccination, resulting in 706 averted cases of shingles and 143 averted cases of PHN. Community pharmacy-based HZ vaccination was less costly (-$131,894) and gained more QALYs (52.2) compared to the non-pharmacy-based vaccination. A series of sensitivity analyses showed that the findings were robust.
CONCLUSIONS: Community pharmacy-based herpes zoster vaccination was less costly and gained more QALYs and was associated with improved other clinical outcomes in the State of Utah. This study might be used as a model for future evaluations of other community pharmacy-based vaccination programs in the United States.
METHODS: In this umbrella review, we searched four databases (Pubmed, Embase, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Epistemonikos) from database inception to April 2022. The methodological quality of each meta-analysis was assessed using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews, version 2 (AMSTAR-2). The strength of evidence of the associations between race and ethnicity with outcomes was ranked according to established criteria as convincing, highly suggestive, suggestive, weak, or non-significant. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42022336805.
RESULTS: Of 880 records screened, we selected seven meta-analyses for evidence synthesis, with 42 associations examined. Overall, 10 of 42 associations were statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05). Two associations were highly suggestive, two were suggestive, and two were weak, whereas the remaining 32 associations were non-significant. The risk of COVID-19 infection was higher in Black individuals compared to White individuals (risk ratio, 2.08, 95% Confidence Interval (CI), 1.60-2.71), which was supported by highly suggestive evidence; with the conservative estimates from the sensitivity analyses, this association remained suggestive. Among those infected with COVID-19, Hispanic individuals had a higher risk of COVID-19 hospitalization than non-Hispanic White individuals (odds ratio, 2.08, 95% CI, 1.60-2.70) with highly suggestive evidence which remained after sensitivity analyses.
CONCLUSION: Individuals of Black and Hispanic groups had a higher risk of COVID-19 infection and hospitalization compared to their White counterparts. These associations of race and ethnicity and COVID-19 outcomes existed more obviously in the pre-hospitalization stage. More consideration should be given in this stage for addressing health inequity.