You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 168 No. 1, January 14, 2008 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Editor's Correspondence
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related letter
 •Related article
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Immunization
 •Public Health, Other
 •Violence and Human Rights
 •Bioterrorism
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati
What's this?

COMMENTS AND OPINIONS
Preattack Vaccination Against Anthrax May Be Cost-effective in Certain Populations

Robert J. Hopkins, MD, MPH, TM; Thomas A. Waytes, MD, PhD; Thomas K. Zink, MD

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Schmitt et al1 report that preexposure anthrax vaccination of US Postal Service (USPS) employees is more costly and results in more anthrax infections and deaths than postattack intervention. We believe that these conclusions are incorrect owing to a flawed study design and several questionable parameter estimates.

The most important flaw is the assumption that unvaccinated workers would be denied antibiotics after an attack, especially when 50% adherence to preattack vaccination is presumed. If instead these workers were modeled to receive antibiotics, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained preventing anthrax cases would exceed QALYs lost to vaccine adverse events. Based on the presented incidence, duration and quality-of-life effects of vaccine adverse effects, 0.0000148 QALYs are lost per vaccination series. With a 50% adherence assumption, 2.6 QALYs would be lost because of adverse events. If one assumes that . . . [Full Text of this Article]


AUTHOR INFORMATION


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati     What's this?

RELATED LETTER

Preattack Vaccination Against Anthrax May Be Cost-effective in Certain Populations—Reply
Brian P. Schmitt, Deborah Dobrez, Demetrios N. Kyriacou, and Jorge Parada
Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(1):115.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED ARTICLE

Responding to a Small-scale Bioterrorist Anthrax Attack: Cost-effectiveness Analysis Comparing Preattack Vaccination With Postattack Antibiotic Treatment and Vaccination
Brian Schmitt, Deborah Dobrez, Jorge P. Parada, Demetrios N. Kyriacou, Robert M. Golub, Rishi Sharma, and Charles Bennett
Arch Intern Med. 2007;167(7):655-662.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  






HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2008 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.