scholarly journals Consideration of Trade-offs Regarding COVID-19 Containment Measures in the United States

Author(s):  
Mayvis Rebeira ◽  
Eric Nauenberg

Abstract Background: The economic stimulus package in the United States, which totalled $2.48 trillion, was designed to soften the economic impact of sweeping containment measures including shelter-in-place orders that were put in place to control the COVID-19 pandemic.Methods: In healthcare, interventions are rarely justified simply in terms of the number of lives saved but also in terms of a myriad of other trade-off factors including value-for-money or cost-effectiveness. Cost-effectiveness analysis was therefore conducted as the cost per life-year gained (Cost/LYG) from the containment measures adopted based on several different projections of the baseline number of deaths in the absence of any containment measures. Reductions in premature mortality due to the shutdown (i.e. the difference between years of life lost relative to life expectancy under the shutdown and no shutdown scenarios) were used to calculate changes in health status. Given that men and women have different life expectancies, the analysis calculates premature mortality for men and women by age bracket. Results: The results showed seven different scenarios that reflect different death projections. It showed that as the projected number of deaths increases, the cost-effectiveness of the containment measures becomes more favourable i.e. providing better value-for money for US taxpayers. Cost-effectiveness ranged from $180,874 per life-year-gained for the high-end projection to $4,258,780 per life-year gained for the low-end death projection estimate.Conclusion: Incremental costs per life-year gained related to the economic shutdown can span a wide range depending on the baseline number of deaths in the absence of any containment measures. The results show that in the US, under no scenario for life-years gained does the stimulus package compare favourably to other healthcare interventions that have had favourable cost-effectiveness profiles. However, when comparing value-of-statistical-life-year (VSLY) threshold measures used in other sectors, it is plausible that the U.S. stimulus package could be viewed more favourably from a cost-effectiveness perspective. Given the wide-ranging impacts that COVID-19 has had on American life, it would seem that the comparison should be made to experiences in multiple sectors and on this basis, it appears that the shutdown is likely to represent good value-for-money.

2013 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 414-424 ◽  
Author(s):  
Josh J. Carlson ◽  
Ryan N. Hansen ◽  
Roger R. Dmochowski ◽  
Denise R. Globe ◽  
Danielle C. Colayco ◽  
...  

Neurosurgery ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 66 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shehryar R Sheikh ◽  
Michael P Steinmetz ◽  
Michael W Kattan ◽  
Mendel Singer ◽  
Belinda Udeh ◽  
...  

Abstract INTRODUCTION Surgery is an effective treatment for many pharmacoresistant temporal lobe epilepsy patients, but incurs considerable cost. It is unknown whether surgery and surgical evaluation are cost-effective strategies in the United States. We aim to evaluate whether 1) surgery is cost-effective for patients who have been deemed surgical candidates when compared to continued medical management, 2) surgical evaluation is cost-effective for patients who have drug-resistant temporal epilepsy and may or may not ultimately be deemed surgical candidates METHODS We use a Monte Carlo simulation method to assess the cost-effectiveness of surgery and surgical evaluation over a lifetime horizon. Patients transition between two health states (‘seizure free’ and ‘having seizures’) as part of a Markov process, based on literature estimates. We adopt both healthcare and societal perspectives, including direct healthcare costs and indirect costs such as lost earnings by patients and care providers. We estimate variability of model predictions using probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS 1) Epilepsy surgery is cost effective in surgically eligible patients by virtue of being cost saving and more effective than medical management in the long run, with 95% of 10 000 Monte Carlo simulations favoring surgery. From a societal perspective, surgery becomes cost effective within 3 yr. At 5 yr, surgery has an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $31,600, which is significantly below the societal willingness-to-pay (∼ $100,000/quality-adjusted life years (QALY)) and comparable to hip/knee arthroplasty. 2) Surgical evaluation is cost-effective in pharmacoresistant patients even if the probability of being deemed a surgical candidate is low (5%-10%). Even if the probability of surgical eligibility is only 10%, surgical referral has an ICER of $96,000/QALY, which is below societal willingness-to-pay. CONCLUSION Epilepsy surgery and surgical evaluation are both cost-effective strategies in the United States. Pharmacoresistant temporal lobe epilepsy patients should be referred for surgical evaluation without hesitation on cost-effectiveness grounds.


Addiction ◽  
2001 ◽  
Vol 96 (9) ◽  
pp. 1267-1278 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul G. Barnett ◽  
Gregory S. Zaric ◽  
Margaret L. Brandeau

2013 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. A105
Author(s):  
J.J. Carlson ◽  
R.N. Hansen ◽  
R. Dmochowski ◽  
D. Globe ◽  
D. Colayco ◽  
...  

PLoS ONE ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. e0192132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Borja G. Reguero ◽  
Michael W. Beck ◽  
David N. Bresch ◽  
Juliano Calil ◽  
Imen Meliane

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document