Protocol for the economic evaluation of COVID-19 pandemic response policies
Open Access
- 14 September 2021
- Vol. 11 (9), e051503
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-051503
Abstract
Introduction Several treatment options are available for COVID-19 to date. However, the use of a combination of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) is necessary for jurisdictions to contain its spread. Although the implementation cost of NPIs may be low from the healthcare system perspective, it can be costly when considering the indirect costs from the societal perspective. COVID-19 vaccination campaigns have begun in several countries worldwide. Nonetheless, the quantity of vaccines available remain limited over the next 1 to 2 years. A tool for informing vaccine prioritisation that considers both cost and effectiveness will be highly useful. This study aims to identify the most cost-effective combination of COVID-19 response policies, using Singapore as an example. Methods and analysis An age-stratified Susceptible-Exposed-Infectious-Recovered model will be used to generate the number of infections stratified by disease severity under different intervention scenarios. Polices of interest include test-trace-isolate, travel restriction, compulsory face mask and hygiene practices, social distancing, dexamethasone/remdesivir therapy and vaccination. The latest phase 3 trial results and the WHO Target Product Profiles for COVID-19 vaccines will be used to model vaccine characteristics. A cost (expected resource utilisation and productivity losses) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) will be attached to these outputs for a cost-utility analysis. The primary outcome measure will be the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio generated from the incremental cost of policy alternatives expressed as a ratio of the incremental benefits (QALYs gained). Efficacy of policy options will be gathered from literature review and from its observed impacts in Singapore. Cost data will be gathered from healthcare institutions, Ministry of Health and published data. Sensitivity analysis such as threshold analysis and scenario analysis will be conducted. Ethics and dissemination Ethics approval was not required for this study. The study findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals.Funding Information
- Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (OPP1202541)
- National Medical Research Council, Ministry of Health, Singapore (COVID19RF3-0057)
This publication has 23 references indexed in Scilit:
- Impact of isolation precautions on quality of life: a meta-analysisJournal of Hospital Infection, 2020
- Paternal sperm DNA mosaicism and recurrence risk of autism in familiesNature Medicine, 2019
- Bayesian Methods for Calibrating Health Policy Models: A TutorialPharmacoEconomics, 2017
- Recommendations for Conduct, Methodological Practices, and Reporting of Cost-effectiveness AnalysesJAMA, 2016
- Markov Models and Cost Effectiveness Analysis: Applications in Medical ResearchPublished by Springer Science and Business Media LLC ,2016
- CONSOLIDATED HEALTH ECONOMIC EVALUATION REPORTING STANDARDS (CHEERS) STATEMENTInternational Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 2013
- Model Transparency and ValidationMedical Decision Making, 2012
- Dynamic Transmission Modeling: A Report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force-5Value in Health, 2012
- Calibrating Models in Economic EvaluationPharmacoEconomics, 2011
- Health Benefits, Risks, and Cost-Effectiveness of Influenza Vaccination of ChildrenEmerging Infectious Diseases, 2006