Reddy, KP;
Shebl, FM;
Foote, JHA;
Harling, G;
Scott, JA;
Panella, C;
Fitzmaurice, KP;
... Siedner, MJ; + view all
(2020)
Cost-effectiveness of public health strategies for COVID-19 epidemic control in South Africa.
Preview |
Text
Reddy LanGH 2020.pdf - Published Version Download (562kB) | Preview |
Abstract
Background Healthcare resource constraints in low and middle-income countries necessitate selection of cost-effective public health interventions to address COVID-19. Methods We developed a dynamic COVID-19 microsimulation model to evaluate clinical and economic outcomes and cost-effectiveness of epidemic control strategies in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Interventions assessed were Healthcare Testing (HT), where diagnostic testing is performed only for those presenting to healthcare centres; Contact Tracing (CT) in households of cases; Isolation Centres (IC), for cases not requiring hospitalisation; community health worker-led Mass Symptom Screening and diagnostic testing for symptomatic individuals (MS); and Quarantine Centres (QC), for contacts who test negative. Given uncertainties about epidemic dynamics in South Africa, we evaluated two main epidemic scenarios over 360 days, with effective reproduction numbers (R e ) of 1.5 and 1.2. We compared HT, HT+CT, HT+CT+IC, HT+CT+IC+MS, HT+CT+IC+QC, and HT+CT+IC+MS+QC, considering strategies with incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) <US$1,290/year-of-life saved (YLS) to be cost-effective. Findings With R e 1.5, HT resulted in the most COVID-19 deaths and lowest costs over 360 days. Compared with HT, HT+CT+IC+MS reduced mortality by 76%, increased costs by 16%, and was cost-effective (ICER $350/YLS). HT+CT+IC+MS+QC provided the greatest reduction in mortality, but increased costs by 95% compared with HT+CT+IC+MS and was not cost-effective (ICER $8,000/YLS). With R e 1.2, HT+CT+IC+MS was the least costly strategy, and HT+CT+IC+MS+QC was not cost-effective (ICER $294,320/YLS). Interpretation In South Africa, a strategy of household contact tracing, isolation, and mass symptom screening would substantially reduce COVID-19 mortality and be cost-effective. Adding quarantine centres for COVID-19 contacts is not cost-effective.
| Type: | Working / discussion paper |
|---|---|
| Title: | Cost-effectiveness of public health strategies for COVID-19 epidemic control in South Africa |
| Location: | United States |
| Open access status: | An open access version is available from UCL Discovery |
| DOI: | 10.1101/2020.06.29.20140111 |
| Publisher version: | https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.06.29.20140111 |
| Language: | English |
| Additional information: | The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license. |
| UCL classification: | UCL UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Population Health Sciences > Institute for Global Health |
| URI: | https://discovery-pp.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10115678 |
Archive Staff Only
 |
View Item |
