School of Medicine, University of Crete, Heraklion, Greece
Department of Oral Health Policy and Epidemiology, Harvard School of Dental Medicine, Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
BMJ Open. 2023 Oct 31;13(10):e077602. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-077602.
The economic burden of COVID-19 pandemic is substantial, with both direct and indirect costs playing a significant role.
A systematic literature review was conducted to estimate the cost of the COVID-19 pandemic and the cost-effectiveness of pharmaceutical or non-pharmaceutical interventions. All cost data were adjusted to the 2021 Euro, and interventions compared with null.
Ovid MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from January 2020 through 22 April 2021.
Studies regarding COVID-19 outbreak or public health preparedness measures or interventions with outcome measures related to the direct and indirect costs for disease and preparedness and/or response in countries of the European Union (EU), the European Economic Area (EEA), the UK and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) of all relevant epidemiological designs which estimate cost within the selected time frame were considered eligible.
Studies were searched, screened and coded independently by two reviewers with high measure of inter-rater agreement. Data were extracted to a predefined data extraction sheet. The risk of bias was assessed using the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria checklist.
We included data from 41 economic studies. Ten studies evaluated the cost of the COVID-19 pandemic, while 31 assessed the cost-benefit of public health surveillance, preparedness and response measures. Overall, the economic burden of the COVID-19 pandemic was found to be substantial. Community screening, bed provision policies, investing in personal-protective-equipment and vaccination strategies were cost-effective. Physical distancing measures were associated with health benefits; however, their cost-effectiveness was dependent on the duration, compliance and the phase of the epidemic in which it was implemented.
COVID-19 pandemic is associated with substantial short-term and long-term economic costs to healthcare systems, payers and societies, while interventions including testing and screening policies, vaccination and physical distancing policies were identified as those presenting cost-effective options to deal with the pandemic, dependent on population vaccination and the R at the stage of the pandemic.
COVID-19 大流行造成了巨大的经济负担，直接和间接成本都发挥了重要作用。
系统地进行文献综述，以评估 COVID-19 大流行的成本和药物或非药物干预措施的成本效益。所有成本数据均调整为 2021 年欧元，并与零干预进行比较。
2020 年 1 月至 2021 年 4 月 22 日，通过 Ovid MEDLINE 和 EMBASE 进行了搜索。
研究对象为 COVID-19 爆发或公共卫生准备措施或干预措施，结局指标为欧盟、欧洲经济区、英国和经济合作与发展组织（OECD）国家的疾病、准备和/或应对的直接和间接成本，所有相关流行病学设计的研究均符合条件，研究在选定的时间范围内估计成本，并具有较高的评价者间一致性。
由两名评价者独立进行研究检索、筛选和编码，评价者间一致性高。将数据提取到预定义的数据提取表中。使用健康经济标准共识清单评估偏倚风险。
我们纳入了 41 项经济研究的数据。10 项研究评估了 COVID-19 大流行的成本，31 项研究评估了公共卫生监测、准备和应对措施的成本效益。总体而言，COVID-19 大流行造成了巨大的经济负担。社区筛查、床位供应政策、投资个人防护装备和疫苗接种策略具有成本效益。物理隔离措施与健康效益相关；然而，其成本效益取决于实施的持续时间、遵守情况和疫情阶段。
COVID-19 大流行给医疗保健系统、支付者和社会带来了巨大的短期和长期经济成本，而包括检测和筛查政策、疫苗接种和物理隔离政策在内的干预措施被认为是应对大流行的具有成本效益的选择，取决于人群的疫苗接种率和大流行阶段的 R 值。
