Schonberger Robert B, Listokin Yair J, Ayres Ian, Yaesoubi Reza, Shelley Zachary R
Department of Anesthesiology; Yale School of Medicine; New Haven, CT.
Yale Law School; New Haven, CT.
medRxiv. 2020 Jun 28:2020.06.26.20141044. doi: 10.1101/2020.06.26.20141044.
Fierce debate about the health and financial tradeoffs presented by different COVID-19 pandemic mitigation strategies highlights the need for rigorous quantitative evaluation of policy options.
To quantify the economic value of the costs and benefits of a policy of continued limited reopening with social distancing relative to alternative COVID-19 response strategies in the United States.
We estimate the number and value of quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) gained from mortality averted, with a value of $125,000 per QALY, and compare these benefits to the associated costs in terms of plausible effects on US GDP under a policy of continued limited reopening with social distancing relative to a policy of full reopening toward herd immunity. Using the same QALY value assumptions, we further evaluate cost-effectiveness of a return to Shelter-in-Place relative to a policy of limited reopening.
United States.
QALY and cost as percent of GDP of limited reopening with continued social distancing relative to a strategy of full reopening aimed at achieving herd immunity; a limited reopening "budget" measured in the number of months before this strategy fails to demonstrate cost-effectiveness relative to a full reopening; a shelter-in-place "threshold" measured in the number of lives saved at which a month of sheltering in place demonstrates cost effectiveness relative to the limited reopening strategy.
QALY benefits from mortality averted by continued social distancing and limited reopening relative to a policy of full reopening exceed projected GDP costs if an effective vaccine or therapeutic can be developed within 11.1 months from late May 2020. White House vaccine projections fall within this date, supporting a partial reopening strategy. One month of shelter-in-place restrictions provides QALY benefits from averted mortality that exceed the associated GDP costs relative to limited reopening if the restrictions prevent at least 154,586 additional COVID-19 deaths over the course of the pandemic. Current models of disease progression suggest that limited reopening will not cause this many additional deaths, again supporting a limited reopening strategy.
Limited horizon of COVID-19 mortality projections; infection fatality ratio stable across strategies, ignoring both the potential for ICU overload to increase mortality and the deployment of partially effective therapeutics to decrease mortality; effect on GDP modeled as constant within a given phase of the pandemic; accounts for age and sex distribution of QALYs, but not effect of comorbidities; only considers impact from QALY lost due to mortality and from changes in GDP, excluding numerous other considerations, such as non-fatal COVID-19 morbidity, reduced quality of life caused by prolonged social distancing, or educational regression associated with prolonged school closures and restrictions.
A limited reopening to achieve partial mitigation of COVID-19 is cost effective relative to a full reopening if an effective therapeutic or vaccine can be deployed within 11.1 months of late May 2020. One additional month of shelter-in-place restrictions should only be imposed if it saves at least 154,586 lives per month before the development of an effective therapeutic or vaccine relative to limited reopening.
关于不同的新冠疫情缓解策略所带来的健康与经济权衡的激烈辩论凸显了对政策选项进行严格定量评估的必要性。
量化与美国其他新冠应对策略相比,持续有限度重新开放并保持社交距离政策的成本和收益的经济价值。
我们估算了通过避免死亡所获得的质量调整生命年(QALY)的数量和价值,每QALY价值为125,000美元,并将这些收益与持续有限度重新开放并保持社交距离政策相对于全面开放以实现群体免疫政策对美国国内生产总值(GDP)的合理影响所产生的相关成本进行比较。使用相同的QALY价值假设,我们进一步评估相对于有限度重新开放政策,恢复就地避难政策的成本效益。
美国。
与旨在实现群体免疫的全面开放策略相比,持续社交距离的有限度重新开放的QALY和成本占GDP的百分比;以该策略相对于全面开放未能证明成本效益之前的月数来衡量的有限度重新开放“预算”;以就地避难一个月相对于有限度重新开放策略显示成本效益时所挽救的生命数量来衡量的就地避难“阈值”。
如果能在2020年5月下旬起的11.1个月内研发出有效的疫苗或治疗方法,那么相对于全面开放政策,持续社交距离和有限度重新开放政策通过避免死亡所带来的QALY收益超过预计的GDP成本。白宫的疫苗预测在这个日期范围内,支持部分重新开放策略。如果在疫情期间,就地避难限制措施能防止至少154,586例额外的新冠死亡病例,那么相对于有限度重新开放政策,一个月的就地避难限制措施通过避免死亡所带来的QALY收益超过相关的GDP成本。当前的疾病进展模型表明,有限度重新开放不会导致这么多额外死亡病例,这再次支持有限度重新开放策略。
新冠死亡率预测的时间范围有限;各策略的感染致死率稳定,忽略了重症监护病房(ICU)超负荷增加死亡率的可能性以及部分有效治疗方法的部署降低死亡率的情况;在疫情的给定阶段,对GDP的影响建模为恒定不变;考虑了QALY的年龄和性别分布,但未考虑合并症的影响;仅考虑了因死亡导致的QALY损失以及GDP变化的影响,排除了许多其他因素,如非致命性新冠发病率、长期社交距离导致的生活质量下降,或与长期学校关闭和限制相关的教育退步。
如果能在2020年5月下旬起的11.1个月内部署有效的治疗方法或疫苗,那么为部分缓解新冠疫情而进行的有限度重新开放相对于全面开放具有成本效益。相对于有限度重新开放,只有在有效治疗方法或疫苗研发出来之前,每月至少能挽救154,586条生命时,才应额外实施一个月的就地避难限制措施。