Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Public Health 1/2011

01-02-2011 | Original Article

Criteria for vaccine introduction: results of a DELPHI discussion among international immunisation experts on a stepwise decision-making procedure

Authors: Brigitte Piso, Ingrid Zechmeister, Sabine Geiger-Gritsch

Published in: Journal of Public Health | Issue 1/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Based on a model of a stepwise approach for decision-making on vaccine introduction, this study aimed to reveal unpublished decision aids, to assess cut-off limits or thresholds for vaccine introduction that have already been used, and to discuss the comprehensiveness and feasibility of our suggested model.

Methods

Forty international immunisation experts were invited to a DELPHI discussion, 14 finally participated. Experts received a questionnaire and were asked for comments on other experts’ opinions and specification of their previously given answers in the second DELPHI round. We did not intend to develop a consensus document.

Results

Though most of the DELPHI participants were not aware of decision aids other than the five that had been used for the development of our model, the international discussion revealed four additional national documents that define decision-making criteria. Except for one example with a cost-utility ratio, no defined thresholds or cut-off limits have been used in vaccine introduction decisions so far. The majority of experts believe that a stepwise approach could enhance the feasibility of decision aids. The experts agreed that the influence of each single criterion of our model should be at least “important” for decision-making. The most often mentioned possible negative consequence that could arise from a rigid stepwise procedure, was a delay of the vaccine introduction process.

Conclusions

The suggested stepwise procedure provides a systematic and evidence-based standardised way to support public health immunisation policy decisions. A framework could be a common starting point.
Literature
go back to reference Castillo-Solórzano C, Andrus J (2004) El desarrollo de nuevas vacunas: generación de información para la toma de decisions. Rev Panam Salud Públ 15(1):1–3 Castillo-Solórzano C, Andrus J (2004) El desarrollo de nuevas vacunas: generación de información para la toma de decisions. Rev Panam Salud Públ 15(1):1–3
go back to reference Erickson LJ, De Wals P, Farand L (2005) An analytical framework for immunization programs in Canada. Vaccine 23(19):2470–2476CrossRefPubMed Erickson LJ, De Wals P, Farand L (2005) An analytical framework for immunization programs in Canada. Vaccine 23(19):2470–2476CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference George B, Harris A, Mitchell A (2001) Cost-effectiveness analysis and the consistency of decision-making: evidence from pharmaceutical reimbursement in Australia (1991 to 1996). Pharmacoeconomics 19(11):1103–1109CrossRefPubMed George B, Harris A, Mitchell A (2001) Cost-effectiveness analysis and the consistency of decision-making: evidence from pharmaceutical reimbursement in Australia (1991 to 1996). Pharmacoeconomics 19(11):1103–1109CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Houweling H, Verweij M, Ruitenberg EJ (2010) Criteria for inclusion of vaccinations in public programmes. Vaccine 28(17):2924–2931CrossRefPubMed Houweling H, Verweij M, Ruitenberg EJ (2010) Criteria for inclusion of vaccinations in public programmes. Vaccine 28(17):2924–2931CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Hutt HJ (2008) How do we tackle the complex field of vaccinology in the twenty-first century? J Public Health 16(4): 245-246 Hutt HJ (2008) How do we tackle the complex field of vaccinology in the twenty-first century? J Public Health 16(4): 245-246
go back to reference Kimman TG, Boot HJ, Berbers GAM, Vermeer-de Bondt PE, Ardine de Wit G, de Melker HE (2006) Developing a vaccination evaluation model to support evidence-based decision-making on national immunization programs. Vaccine 24(22):4769–4778CrossRefPubMed Kimman TG, Boot HJ, Berbers GAM, Vermeer-de Bondt PE, Ardine de Wit G, de Melker HE (2006) Developing a vaccination evaluation model to support evidence-based decision-making on national immunization programs. Vaccine 24(22):4769–4778CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Lopalco PL (2010) Improving vaccination programmes in the European Union. J Public Health 16(4): 281-285 Lopalco PL (2010) Improving vaccination programmes in the European Union. J Public Health 16(4): 281-285
go back to reference Stratton K, Durch J, Lawrence S, Editors Committee to Study Priorities for Vaccine Development Division of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Institute of Medicine (2000) Vaccines for the 21st century: a tool for decisionmaking. National Academies Press, Washington, DC Stratton K, Durch J, Lawrence S, Editors Committee to Study Priorities for Vaccine Development Division of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Institute of Medicine (2000) Vaccines for the 21st century: a tool for decisionmaking. National Academies Press, Washington, DC
Metadata
Title
Criteria for vaccine introduction: results of a DELPHI discussion among international immunisation experts on a stepwise decision-making procedure
Authors
Brigitte Piso
Ingrid Zechmeister
Sabine Geiger-Gritsch
Publication date
01-02-2011
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Journal of Public Health / Issue 1/2011
Print ISSN: 2198-1833
Electronic ISSN: 1613-2238
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-010-0361-7

Other articles of this Issue 1/2011

Journal of Public Health 1/2011 Go to the issue