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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rezapour, Aziz, Souresrafil, Aghdas, Peighambari, Mohammad Mehdi, Heidarali, Mona, Tashakori-Miyanroudi, Mahsa
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