We conducted a study to analyse the efficiency of introducing vaccinat
ion against hepatitis A to the schedule for tl oops in the British Arm
y. The study design included a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of co
st per case avoided comparing active and passive immunization and a co
st-benefit analysis (CBA). The study population comprised all British
Army personnel as well as those soldiers assumed to be deployed to hig
h-risk areas a variable number of times in 5 years. The average cost o
f one case of hepatitis A avoided by vaccination was calculated and co
mpared with the average cost of achieving the same outcome by passive
immunization. In a 5-year four-exposure scenario at a low incidence an
d using a 3% discount race, avoiding One case of hepatitis A by Vaccin
ation would cost pound 52865, against pound 97305 by passive immunizat
ion. The equivalent cost-benefit ratios are 13.4 for gammaglobulin and
7.2 for vaccine. For fewer exposures the break-even point for vaccine
is two exposures in 4 years. Although our estimates are sensitive to
direct costs and relatively sensitive to the estimated incidence, vacc
inating troops against hepatitis A appears to be a more efficient proc
edure than passive immunization, especially as a long-term investment
in troops likely to effect several operational deployments. Given the
difficulty, of forecasting which troops would deploy, the best-buy str
ategy may be vaccination of troops most likely to deploy repeatedly.