Skip to content

Vaccines bring $2.5B in value to Canadian economy, health care system, study says

Analysis estimates savings to the health care system and employers from adults taking six different vaccines recommended by the National Advisory Committee on Immunization.
coronavirus-vaccine-administered
Lori Nagel, right, gets her first AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine, administered by pharmacist Sun Yi at Fort Royal Pharmacy on Oak Bay Avenue.

Six common adult vaccines provide $2.5 billion in annual economic value to the Canadian economy and health care system by preventing unnecessary illnesses and missed work days, according to a new study.

The analysis was conducted by leading industry data provider IQVIA and commissioned by the Adult Vaccine Alliance (AVA), a pro-vaccine advocacy group made up of doctors, pharmacists, drug manufacturers and other members of the health care sector.

The IQVIA researchers estimated how much money was saved to the health care system and to employers because of people taking six vaccines recommended by the National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI): COVID-19, seasonal influenza, shingles, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), pneumococcal disease and human papillomavirus (HPV).

Data was derived from mostly public sources. For example, they took data on average hospitalizations for flu and extrapolated it based on vaccination rate, then multiplied number of hospitalizations by average cost per hospitalization.

They found the health care system saved $514-million from these vaccine-preventable illnesses, including $410-million from averted hospitalization costs. The study pegged the value to the economy at $1.9-billion, much of which was from fewer employees missing work or being less productive due to illness.

It also modelled the effect of higher vaccine uptake, estimating that a 10-per-cent increase in vaccination would save $205-million in health care costs and lead to $480-million in productivity gains.

Gregory Taylor, a retired physician, former chief public health officer of Canada and AVA co-chair, said there are a host of medical and societal reasons to vaccinate, but that this study contributed to the monetary case, too.

“If you have healthy employees, your economy is better,” he said.

Only some of these vaccines are covered by public health insurance. For example, a shingles vaccine is covered in Ontario for residents 65 to 70 years old, but not covered in British Columbia. And for those paying out of pocket the costs can be expensive: an RSV shot in Ontario can cost up to $300.

AVA is recommending all six vaccines be covered by public health insurance plans for those who want to receive them.

Dr. Taylor said the group is not staking out a scientific opinion on the vaccines, but is following the recommendations from the experts at the federal NACI; if the NACI changed their recommendations, the AVA would follow, he said.

Dr. Taylor acknowledged there can be a perception of a conflict of interest because pharmaceutical makers are among the AVA’s funders, but said they also represent other members of the health care system, including nonprofits and professionals. He said that is part of why they are following the recommendations of NACI, an independent, federally funded body, and not making their own drug endorsements.

Shelita Dattani, a pharmacist, senior vice-president of the Neighbourhood Pharmacy Association of Canada and a member of the AVA executive, said this issue is particularly important as the Canadian population gets older.

“As aging Canadians are more vulnerable to disease and have lower immune responses, and are still in the workforce, that’s a different scenario from maybe 20, 25 years ago,” she said.

Dr. Taylor acknowledged that the savings represent a tiny slice of health-care spending in Canada. The Canadian Institute for Health Information reported last year that health-care spending in Canada reached $344-billion in 2023.

But he said that public coverage of these vaccine, and higher uptake, had minimal costs, and according to the study produced a 341 per cent return on investment.

“Seems to me it makes good economic sense,” he said.