Paltiel A David, Zheng Amy, Sax Paul E
Public Health Modeling Unit, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT.
Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
medRxiv. 2021 Feb 8:2021.02.06.21251270. doi: 10.1101/2021.02.06.21251270.
The value of frequent, rapid testing to reduce community transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is poorly understood.
To define performance standards and predict the clinical, epidemiological, and economic outcomes of nationwide, home-based, antigen testing.
A simple compartmental epidemic model estimated viral transmission, clinical history, and resource use, with and without testing.
Parameter values and ranges informed by Centers for Disease Control guidance and published literature.
United States population.
60 days.
Societal. Costs include: testing, inpatient care, and lost workdays.
Home-based SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing.
Cumulative infections and deaths, numbers isolated and/or hospitalized, and total costs.
RESULTS OF BASE-CASE ANALYSIS: Without a testing intervention, the model anticipates 15 million infections, 125,000 deaths, and $10.4 billion in costs ($6.5 billion inpatient; $3.9 billion lost productivity) over a 60-day horizon. Weekly availability of testing may avert 4 million infections and 19,000 deaths, raising costs by $21.5 billion. Lower inpatient outlays ($5.9 billion) would partially offset additional testing expenditures ($12.0 billion) and workdays lost ($13.9 billion), yielding incremental costs per infection (death) averted of $5,400 ($1,100,000).
Outcome estimates vary widely under different behavioral assumptions and testing frequencies. However, key findings persist across all scenarios: large reductions in infections, mortality, and hospitalizations; and costs per death averted roughly an order of magnitude lower than commonly accepted willingness-to-pay values per statistical life saved ($5-17 million).
Analysis restricted to at-home testing and limited by uncertainties about test performance.
High-frequency home testing for SARS-CoV-2 using an inexpensive, imperfect test could contribute to pandemic control at justifiable cost and warrants consideration as part of a national containment strategy.
频繁、快速检测对于减少严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒2(SARS-CoV-2)的社区传播价值尚不清楚。
确定性能标准,并预测全国范围内居家抗原检测的临床、流行病学和经济结果。
一个简单的分区流行模型估计了有无检测情况下的病毒传播、临床病史和资源使用情况。
由疾病控制中心指南和已发表文献提供的参数值及范围。
美国人口。
60天。
社会层面。成本包括:检测、住院治疗和工作日损失。
居家SARS-CoV-2抗原检测。
累积感染和死亡人数、隔离和/或住院人数以及总成本。
在无检测干预的情况下,该模型预计在60天内会有1500万例感染、12.5万例死亡,成本达104亿美元(住院费用65亿美元;生产力损失39亿美元)。每周进行检测可能避免400万例感染和1.9万例死亡,成本增加215亿美元。较低的住院支出(59亿美元)将部分抵消额外的检测费用(120亿美元)和工作日损失(139亿美元),每避免一例感染(死亡)的增量成本为5400美元(110万美元)。
在不同的行为假设和检测频率下,结局估计差异很大。然而,所有情景下的关键发现一致:感染、死亡率和住院率大幅降低;每避免一例死亡的成本比通常接受的每挽救一个统计生命的支付意愿值(500万 - 1700万美元)低约一个数量级。
分析仅限于居家检测,且受检测性能不确定性的限制。
使用廉价但不完善的检测方法对SARS-CoV-2进行高频居家检测,可能以合理成本有助于大流行控制,值得作为国家遏制战略的一部分加以考虑。