Smallpox cost-effectiveness of therapy: Difference between revisions
Joao Silva (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
==Overview== | ==Overview== | ||
The efforts made | The efforts made to eradicate [[smallpox]] were cost-effective given the high morbidity and mortality associated with smallpox. | ||
==Cost-Effectiveness of Therapy== | ==Cost-Effectiveness of Therapy== | ||
Revision as of 21:20, 15 July 2014
|
Smallpox Microchapters |
|
Diagnosis |
|---|
|
Treatment |
|
Case Studies |
|
Smallpox cost-effectiveness of therapy On the Web |
|
American Roentgen Ray Society Images of Smallpox cost-effectiveness of therapy |
|
Risk calculators and risk factors for Smallpox cost-effectiveness of therapy |
Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]; Associate Editor(s)-in-Chief: João André Alves Silva, M.D. [2]
Overview
The efforts made to eradicate smallpox were cost-effective given the high morbidity and mortality associated with smallpox.
Cost-Effectiveness of Therapy
Since there is no available antiviral treatment for smallpox, the vaccine is the only potential cost.[1]
In the past, the development and distribution of the bifurcated needle represented one of the costs. This needle improved the ease and diminished the cost of vaccination. About 1,000 needles cost about $5. The needle could be boiled and reused multiple times. Also, since these needles required a smaller amount of vaccine, each vial with the vaccine could now vaccinate 4 times as many people. This was an important achievement since there were certain countries that could not afford any sort of vaccination above a very minimal cost.
References
- ↑ Moore, Zack S; Seward, Jane F; Lane, J Michael (2006). "Smallpox". The Lancet. 367 (9508): 425–435. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68143-9. ISSN 0140-6736.