![]() Meanwhile, when focusing solely on health costs, one may overlook the broader benefits gained, which may not be well captured in microeconomic evaluation frameworks. These health cost savings are the focus of most microeconomic evaluations. However, the benefit of reducing health care expenditure attributed to infectious diseases is perhaps the most frequently described one where vaccines have repeatedly been shown to generate significant health care savings ( 7). Therefore, investing in vaccination can offer a range of economic benefits of which some are immediate, whereas others may take generations to materialize. This relationship occurs through a number of channels, including improved access to health care, more nutritious food, improved sanitation and living conditions, and the relationship between good health and income that is likely bidirectional ( 5, 6).īuilding on the above reasoning, we observe that vaccination is one of the most powerful tools to prevent the spread of infectious diseases in a community. When looking at macroeconomic assessment, the evidence has shown that country-specific economic growth rates contribute to better health and increased life expectancy. These microeconomic evaluations have been presented in both the developed and the developing world 1– 4. ![]() ![]() Similar conclusions can be drawn for preventative interventions that avoid illness all together. Instinctively, it is understood that if people are healthy, their capacity to deliver labor to the market is enhanced and absenteeism avoided. The economic benefit of a healthy workforce on improved productivity has been supported by a range of microlevel evaluations observed in both developed and developing countries 1– 4. An interesting way to move forward in integrating the micro- and macro-level assessment might be by integrating computable general equilibrium (CGE) models as part of the evaluation framework, as was recently performed for pandemic flu and malaria vaccination. In addition, it is possible to consider that different medical conditions and health care interventions may pose different multiplying effects, suggesting that the manner in which resources are allocated within health services gives rise to variation in the amount of the micro–macro gap. In practical terms, this may give rise to multipliers to apply toward indirect costs to account for the broader macroeconomic benefits linked to changes in health status. Currently available economic evaluation methods typically omit these consequences, however they may be adjusted to integrate these transitional consequences. We propose that there is a transitional domain that links the micro- and macroeconomic improvement attributed to health status changes. The gap suggests that the manner in which health-related productive output is quantified in microeconomic models might not adequately reflect the broader economic benefit. However, the observed gap between micro and macro estimates attributed to health presents challenges to our understanding of health-related productivity changes and, consequently, economic benefits. The discipline of economics provides us with microeconomic and macroeconomic methods for evaluating the economic gains attributed to health status changes. Investing in vaccination is known to offer a wide range of economic and intangible benefits that can potentiate gains for the individual and for society. Vaccination is an established intervention that reduces the burden and prevents the spread of infectious diseases.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |