Simulation and Modelling Research Unit, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
PLoS One. 2013 Apr 9;8(4):e61504. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0061504. Print 2013.
The impact of a newly emerged influenza pandemic will depend on its transmissibility and severity. Understanding how these pandemic features impact on the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of alternative intervention strategies is important for pandemic planning.
A cost effectiveness analysis of a comprehensive range of social distancing and antiviral drug strategies intended to mitigate a future pandemic was conducted using a simulation model of a community of ∼30,000 in Australia. Six pandemic severity categories were defined based on case fatality ratio (CFR), using data from the 2009/2010 pandemic to relate hospitalisation rates to CFR.
Intervention strategies combining school closure with antiviral treatment and prophylaxis are the most cost effective strategies in terms of cost per life year saved (LYS) for all severity categories. The cost component in the cost per LYS ratio varies depending on pandemic severity: for a severe pandemic (CFR of 2.5%) the cost is ∼$9 k per LYS; for a low severity pandemic (CFR of 0.1%) this strategy costs ∼$58 k per LYS; for a pandemic with very low severity similar to the 2009 pandemic (CFR of 0.03%) the cost is ∼$155 per LYS. With high severity pandemics (CFR >0.75%) the most effective attack rate reduction strategies are also the most cost effective. During low severity pandemics costs are dominated by productivity losses due to illness and social distancing interventions, while for high severity pandemics costs are dominated by hospitalisation costs and productivity losses due to death.
The most cost effective strategies for mitigating an influenza pandemic involve combining sustained social distancing with the use of antiviral agents. For low severity pandemics the most cost effective strategies involve antiviral treatment, prophylaxis and short durations of school closure; while these are cost effective they are less effective than other strategies in reducing the infection rate.
新出现的流感大流行的影响将取决于其传染性和严重程度。了解这些大流行特征如何影响替代干预策略的效果和成本效益,对于大流行规划非常重要。
使用澳大利亚一个约 30000 人的社区模拟模型,对旨在减轻未来大流行的一系列综合社会隔离和抗病毒药物策略的成本效益进行了分析。根据病死率(CFR)定义了六个大流行严重程度类别,使用 2009/2010 年大流行的数据将住院率与 CFR 联系起来。
在所有严重程度类别中,将学校关闭与抗病毒治疗和预防相结合的干预策略是最具成本效益的策略,从每挽救一个生命年的成本(LYS)来看。成本效益比中成本部分取决于大流行的严重程度:对于严重的大流行(CFR 为 2.5%),该策略的成本约为每 LYS 9000 美元;对于轻度大流行(CFR 为 0.1%),该策略的成本约为每 LYS 58000 美元;对于类似于 2009 年大流行的严重程度较低的大流行(CFR 为 0.03%),成本约为每 LYS 155 美元。对于高严重程度的大流行(CFR>0.75%),最有效的攻击率降低策略也是最具成本效益的。在轻度大流行期间,成本主要由疾病和社会隔离干预导致的生产力损失所主导,而对于高严重程度的大流行,成本主要由住院费用和因死亡导致的生产力损失所主导。
缓解流感大流行的最具成本效益的策略是将持续的社会隔离与抗病毒药物的使用相结合。对于轻度大流行,最具成本效益的策略涉及抗病毒治疗、预防和短时间的学校关闭;虽然这些策略在降低感染率方面不如其他策略有效,但它们具有成本效益。