 |
|
COMMENTS AND OPINIONS
Preattack Vaccination Against Anthrax May Be Cost-effective in Certain Populations—Reply
Brian P. Schmitt, MD, MPH;
Deborah Dobrez, PhD;
Demetrios N. Kyriacou, MD, PhD;
Jorge Parada, MD, MPH
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
In reply
Hopkins and colleagues from Emergent BioSolutions identify several issues with our model for responding to a small scale anthrax attack.1 They are concerned that our model of preattack vaccination denied unvaccinated workers postattack antibiotics, that we underestimated vaccine efficacy, and that our 10-year time horizon was inadequate. They argue that these deficits produced an erroneous effectiveness assessment of preattack vaccination. Furthermore, they suggest we overestimated vaccine administration cost and excluded costs of cleanup and work force displacement inflating total cost of a preattack vaccination strategy. Lastly, they were concerned we had not stratified exposure risk among workers within the USPS.
They are correct in noting that we did not model preattack vaccination combined with postattack antibiotic prophylaxis for vaccine-noncompliant postal workers. Would this alternative strategy be equivalent or better than combined . . . [Full Text of this Article]
AUTHOR INFORMATION
RELATED LETTER
Preattack Vaccination Against Anthrax May Be Cost-effective in Certain Populations
Robert J. Hopkins, Thomas A. Waytes, and Thomas K. Zink
Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(1):114-115.
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
|
