» Articles » PMID: 35916992

Reducing the Basic Reproduction Number of COVID-19: a Model Simulation Focused on QALYs, Hospitalisation, Productivity Costs and Optimal (soft) Lockdown

Overview
Specialty Health Services
Date 2022 Aug 2
PMID 35916992
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Even if public health interventions are successful at reducing the spread of COVID-19, there is no guarantee that they will bring net benefits to the society because of the dynamic nature of the pandemic, e.g., the risk of a second outbreak if those interventions are stopped too early, and the costs of a continued lockdown. In this analysis, a discrete-time dynamic model is used to simulate the effect of reducing the effective reproduction number, driven by lockdowns ordered in March 2020 in four European countries (UK, France, Italy and Spain), on QALYs and hospitalisation costs. These benefits are valued in monetary terms (€30,000 per QALY assumed) and compared to productivity costs due to reduced economic activity during the lockdown. An analysis of the optimal duration of lockdown is performed where a net benefit is maximised. The switch to a soft lockdown is analysed and compared to a continued lockdown or no intervention. Results vary for two assumptions about hospital capacity of the health system: (a) under unlimited capacity, average benefit ranges from 8.21 to 14.21% of annual GDP, for UK and Spain, respectively; (b) under limited capacity, average benefits are higher than 30.32% of annual GDP in all countries. The simulation results imply that the benefits of lockdown are not substantial unless continued until vaccination of high-risk groups is complete. It is illustrated that lockdown may not bring net benefits under some scenarios and a soft lockdown will be a more efficient alternative from mid-June 2020 only if the basic reproduction number is maintained low (not necessarily below 1) and productivity costs are sufficiently reduced.

Citing Articles

The role of economic evaluation in modelling public health and social measures for pandemic policy: a systematic review.

Rossiter S, Howe S, Szanyi J, Trauer J, Wilson T, Blakely T Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2024; 22(1):77.

PMID: 39487485 PMC: 11531111. DOI: 10.1186/s12962-024-00585-6.


Non-pharmaceutical interventions to reduce COVID-19 transmission in the UK: a rapid mapping review and interactive evidence gap map.

Duval D, Evans B, Sanders A, Hill J, Simbo A, Kavoi T J Public Health (Oxf). 2024; 46(2):e279-e293.

PMID: 38426578 PMC: 11141784. DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdae025.

References
1.
Warren W, Harris R, Haukness M, Fiddes I, Murali S, Fernandes J . Sequence diversity analyses of an improved rhesus macaque genome enhance its biomedical utility. Science. 2020; 370(6523). PMC: 7818670. DOI: 10.1126/science.abc6617. View

2.
Flaxman S, Mishra S, Gandy A, Unwin H, Mellan T, Coupland H . Estimating the effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 in Europe. Nature. 2020; 584(7820):257-261. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-020-2405-7. View

3.
Pinto-Prades J, Loomes G, Brey R . Trying to estimate a monetary value for the QALY. J Health Econ. 2009; 28(3):553-62. DOI: 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2009.02.003. View

4.
Mason H, Jones-Lee M, Donaldson C . Modelling the monetary value of a QALY: a new approach based on UK data. Health Econ. 2008; 18(8):933-50. DOI: 10.1002/hec.1416. View

5.
Verity R, Okell L, Dorigatti I, Winskill P, Whittaker C, Walker P . COVID-19 and the difficulty of inferring epidemiological parameters from clinical data - Authors' reply. Lancet Infect Dis. 2020; 21(1):28. PMC: 7255722. DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30443-6. View