Cargando…
Economic evaluation of programs against COVID-19: A systematic review
BACKGROUND: 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 ab...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
IJS Publishing Group Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7679235/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33227532 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.11.015 |
_version_ | 1783612302631632896 |
---|---|
author | Rezapour, Aziz Souresrafil, Aghdas Peighambari, Mohammad Mehdi Heidarali, Mona Tashakori-Miyanroudi, Mahsa |
author_facet | Rezapour, Aziz Souresrafil, Aghdas Peighambari, Mohammad Mehdi Heidarali, Mona Tashakori-Miyanroudi, Mahsa |
author_sort | Rezapour, Aziz |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: 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. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSION: 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7679235 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | IJS Publishing Group Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-76792352020-11-23 Economic evaluation of programs against COVID-19: A systematic review Rezapour, Aziz Souresrafil, Aghdas Peighambari, Mohammad Mehdi Heidarali, Mona Tashakori-Miyanroudi, Mahsa Int J Surg Review BACKGROUND: 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. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSION: 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. IJS Publishing Group Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. 2021-01 2020-11-21 /pmc/articles/PMC7679235/ /pubmed/33227532 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.11.015 Text en © 2020 IJS Publishing Group Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active. |
spellingShingle | Review Rezapour, Aziz Souresrafil, Aghdas Peighambari, Mohammad Mehdi Heidarali, Mona Tashakori-Miyanroudi, Mahsa Economic evaluation of programs against COVID-19: A systematic review |
title | Economic evaluation of programs against COVID-19: A systematic review |
title_full | Economic evaluation of programs against COVID-19: A systematic review |
title_fullStr | Economic evaluation of programs against COVID-19: A systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Economic evaluation of programs against COVID-19: A systematic review |
title_short | Economic evaluation of programs against COVID-19: A systematic review |
title_sort | economic evaluation of programs against covid-19: a systematic review |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7679235/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33227532 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.11.015 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT rezapouraziz economicevaluationofprogramsagainstcovid19asystematicreview AT souresrafilaghdas economicevaluationofprogramsagainstcovid19asystematicreview AT peighambarimohammadmehdi economicevaluationofprogramsagainstcovid19asystematicreview AT heidaralimona economicevaluationofprogramsagainstcovid19asystematicreview AT tashakorimiyanroudimahsa economicevaluationofprogramsagainstcovid19asystematicreview |