Department of Biostatistics, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
BMC Public Health. 2012 Nov 9;12:962. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-962.
The purpose of this article is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of school closure during a potential influenza pandemic and to examine the trade-off between costs and health benefits for school closure involving different target groups and different closure durations.
We developed two models: a dynamic disease model capturing the spread of influenza and an economic model capturing the costs and benefits of school closure. Decisions were based on quality-adjusted life years gained using incremental cost-effectiveness ratios. The disease model is an age-structured SEIR compartmental model based on the population of Oslo. We studied the costs and benefits of school closure by varying the age targets (kindergarten, primary school, secondary school) and closure durations (1-10 weeks), given pandemics with basic reproductive number of 1.5, 2.0 or 2.5.
The cost-effectiveness of school closure varies depending on the target group, duration and whether indirect costs are considered. Using a case fatality rate (CFR) of 0.1-0.2% and with current cost-effectiveness threshold for Norway, closing secondary school is the only cost-effective strategy, when indirect costs are included. The most cost-effective strategies would be closing secondary schools for 8 weeks if R0=1.5, 6 weeks if R0=2.0, and 4 weeks if R0= 2.5. For severe pandemics with case fatality rates of 1-2%, similar to the Spanish flu, or when indirect costs are disregarded, the optimal strategy is closing kindergarten, primary and secondary school for extended periods of time. For a pandemic with 2009 H1N1 characteristics (mild severity and low transmissibility), closing schools would not be cost-effective, regardless of the age target of school children.
School closure has moderate impact on the epidemic's scope, but the resulting disruption to society imposes a potentially great cost in terms of lost productivity from parents' work absenteeism.
本文旨在评估在潜在流感大流行期间关闭学校的成本效益,并研究不同目标群体和不同关闭时间的学校关闭在成本和健康效益之间的权衡。
我们开发了两个模型:一个动态疾病模型,用于捕捉流感的传播;一个经济模型,用于捕捉学校关闭的成本和效益。决策是基于使用增量成本效益比获得的质量调整生命年来做出的。疾病模型是一个基于奥斯陆人口的年龄结构 SEIR compartmental 模型。我们通过改变目标群体(幼儿园、小学、中学)和关闭时间(1-10 周),研究了在基本繁殖数为 1.5、2.0 或 2.5 的大流行情况下的成本效益。
学校关闭的成本效益取决于目标群体、持续时间以及是否考虑间接成本。在使用病死率(CFR)为 0.1-0.2%和挪威当前的成本效益阈值的情况下,包括间接成本时,关闭中学是唯一具有成本效益的策略。如果 R0=1.5,则最具成本效益的策略是关闭中学 8 周;如果 R0=2.0,则关闭 6 周;如果 R0=2.5,则关闭 4 周。对于病死率为 1-2%的严重大流行,类似于西班牙流感,或者不考虑间接成本时,最佳策略是关闭幼儿园、小学和中学,持续较长时间。对于具有 2009 H1N1 特征(轻度严重程度和低传染性)的大流行,无论儿童的年龄目标如何,关闭学校都不会具有成本效益。
学校关闭对疫情的范围有一定的影响,但由此给社会带来的中断会因父母缺勤而导致生产力损失,从而造成潜在的巨大成本。