Publication related to RSI or an RSI staff member

Evaluation of the United States COVID-19 vaccine allocation strategy.

BACKGROUND: Anticipating an initial shortage of vaccines for COVID-19, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) in the United States developed priority vaccine allocations for specific demographic groups in the population. This study evaluates the performance of the CDC vaccine allocation strategy with respect to multiple potentially competing vaccination goals (minimizing mortality, cases, infections, and years of life lost (YLL)), under the same framework as the CDC allocation: four priority vaccination groups and population demographics stratified by age, comorbidities, occupation and living condition (congested or non-congested). METHODS AND FINDINGS: We developed a compartmental disease model that incorporates key elements of the current pandemic including age-varying susceptibility to infection, age-varying clinical fraction, an active case-count dependent social distancing level, and time-varying infectivity (accounting for the emergence of more infectious virus strains). The CDC allocation strategy is compared to all other possibly optimal allocations that stagger vaccine roll-out in up to four phases (17.5 million strategies). The CDC allocation strategy performed well in all vaccination goals but never optimally. Under the developed model, the CDC allocation deviated from the optimal allocations by small amounts, with 0.19% more deaths, 4.0% more cases, 4.07% more infections, and 0.97% higher YLL, than the respective optimal strategies. The CDC decision to not prioritize the vaccination of individuals under the age of 16 was optimal, as was the prioritization of health-care workers and other essential workers over non-essential workers. Finally, a higher prioritization of individuals with comorbidities in all age groups improved outcomes compared to the CDC allocation. CONCLUSION: The developed approach can be used to inform the design of future vaccine allocation strategies in the United States, or adapted for use by other countries seeking to optimize the effectiveness of their vaccine allocation strategies.

Authors

  • Islam, Md Rafiul, Islam MR, Department of Mathematics, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United States of America.

  • Oraby, Tamer, Oraby T, School of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, Edinburg, TX, United States of America.

  • McCombs, Audrey, McCombs A, Department of Statistics, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United States of America.

  • Chowdhury, Mohammad Mihrab, Chowdhury MM, Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX, United States of America.

  • Al-Mamun, Mohammad, Al-Mamun M, Department of Pharmaceutical Systems and Policy, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV, United States of America.

  • Tyshenko, Michael G, Tyshenko MG, McLaughlin Centre for Population Health Risk Assessment, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.

  • Kadelka, Claus, Kadelka C, Department of Mathematics, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, United States of America.

YEAR OF PUBLICATION: 2021
SOURCE: PLoS One. 2021 Nov 17;16(11):e0259700. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0259700. eCollection 2021.
JOURNAL TITLE ABBREVIATION: PLoS One
JOURNAL TITLE: PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203 (Electronic) 1932-6203 (Linking)
VOLUME: 16
ISSUE: 11
PAGES: e0259700
PLACE OF PUBLICATION: United States
ABSTRACT:
BACKGROUND: Anticipating an initial shortage of vaccines for COVID-19, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) in the United States developed priority vaccine allocations for specific demographic groups in the population. This study evaluates the performance of the CDC vaccine allocation strategy with respect to multiple potentially competing vaccination goals (minimizing mortality, cases, infections, and years of life lost (YLL)), under the same framework as the CDC allocation: four priority vaccination groups and population demographics stratified by age, comorbidities, occupation and living condition (congested or non-congested). METHODS AND FINDINGS: We developed a compartmental disease model that incorporates key elements of the current pandemic including age-varying susceptibility to infection, age-varying clinical fraction, an active case-count dependent social distancing level, and time-varying infectivity (accounting for the emergence of more infectious virus strains). The CDC allocation strategy is compared to all other possibly optimal allocations that stagger vaccine roll-out in up to four phases (17.5 million strategies). The CDC allocation strategy performed well in all vaccination goals but never optimally. Under the developed model, the CDC allocation deviated from the optimal allocations by small amounts, with 0.19% more deaths, 4.0% more cases, 4.07% more infections, and 0.97% higher YLL, than the respective optimal strategies. The CDC decision to not prioritize the vaccination of individuals under the age of 16 was optimal, as was the prioritization of health-care workers and other essential workers over non-essential workers. Finally, a higher prioritization of individuals with comorbidities in all age groups improved outcomes compared to the CDC allocation. CONCLUSION: The developed approach can be used to inform the design of future vaccine allocation strategies in the United States, or adapted for use by other countries seeking to optimize the effectiveness of their vaccine allocation strategies.
LANGUAGE: eng
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 2021
DATE OF ELECTRONIC PUBLICATION: 20211117
DATE COMPLETED: 20240724
DATE REVISED: 20240724
MESH DATE: 2021/11/25 06:00
EDAT: 2021/11/18 06:00
STATUS: MEDLINE
PUBLICATION STATUS: epublish
LOCATION IDENTIFIER: 10.1371/journal.pone.0259700 [doi] e0259700
OWNER: NLM

Related RSI Experts

Michael G. Tyshenko

Senior Health Risk Analyst

Dr. Michael G. Tyshenko is a Senior Health Risk Analyst at Risk Sciences International (RSI), where he has contributed since 2018 to some of the organization’s most complex and cross-cutting public health risk projects. As RSI’s lead on chemical peer...
Read More about Michael G. Tyshenko