Health Management and Economics Research Center, School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Department of Health Economics, School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Int J Surg. 2021 Jan;85:10-18. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.11.015. Epub 2020 Nov 21.
The COVID-19 pandemic has become a public health emergency and raised global concerns in about 213 countries without vaccines and with limited medical capacity to treat the disease. The COVID-19 has prompted an urgent search for effective interventions, and there is little information about the money value of treatments. The present study aimed to summarize economic evaluation evidence of preventing strategies, programs, and treatments of COVID-19.
We searched Medline/PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science Core Collection, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and specialized databases of economic evaluation from December 2019 to July 2020 to identify relevant literature to economic evaluation of programs against COVID-19. Two researchers screened titles and abstracts, extracted data from full-text articles, and did their quality assessment by the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Then, quality synthesis of results was done.
Twenty-six studies of economic evaluations met our inclusion criteria. The CHEERS scores for most studies (n = 9) were 85 or higher (excellent quality). Eight studies scored 70 to 85 (good quality), eight studies scored 55 to 70 (average quality), and one study < %55 (poor quality). The decision-analytic modeling was applied to twenty-three studies (88%) to evaluate their services. Most studies utilized the SIR model for outcomes. In studies with long-time horizons, social distancing was more cost-effective than quarantine, non-intervention, and herd immunity. Personal protective equipment was more cost-effective in the short-term than non-intervention. Screening tests were cost-effective in all studies.
The results suggested screening tests and social distancing to be cost-effective alternatives in preventing and controlling COVID-19 on a long-time horizon. However, evidence is still insufficient and too heterogeneous to allow any definite conclusions regarding costs of interventions. Further research as are required in the future.
COVID-19 大流行已成为全球公共卫生紧急事件，在大约 213 个没有疫苗且医疗能力有限的国家引发了全球关注。COVID-19 促使人们紧急寻找有效的干预措施，而关于治疗方法的货币价值的信息很少。本研究旨在总结 COVID-19 预防策略、计划和治疗的经济评估证据。
我们检索了 Medline/PubMed、Cochrane 图书馆、Web of Science 核心合集、Embase、Scopus、Google Scholar 和专门的经济评估数据库，以确定针对 COVID-19 的计划的经济评估相关文献。两名研究人员筛选标题和摘要，从全文文章中提取数据，并使用 CONSORT 健康经济评估报告标准（CHEERS）检查表进行质量评估。然后，对结果进行质量综合。
26 项经济评估研究符合我们的纳入标准。大多数研究（n=9）的 CHEERS 评分在 85 分以上（优秀质量）。8 项研究得分为 70 至 85 分（良好质量），8 项研究得分为 55 至 70 分（中等质量），1 项研究<55 分（差质量）。23 项研究（88%）采用决策分析模型评估其服务。大多数研究采用 SIR 模型评估结果。在具有长时间跨度的研究中，与检疫、非干预和群体免疫相比，社会隔离更具成本效益。与非干预相比，个人防护设备在短期内更具成本效益。在所有研究中，筛查测试都是具有成本效益的。
结果表明，在长时间跨度内，筛查测试和社会隔离是预防和控制 COVID-19 的具有成本效益的替代方案。然而，证据仍然不足且过于异质，无法就干预措施的成本得出任何明确结论。未来需要进一步研究。
