Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Risk Anal ; 2023 Jan 17.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2193202

ABSTRACT

In 2021, the Biden Administration issued mandates requiring COVID-19 vaccinations for U.S. federal employees and contractors and for some healthcare and private sector workers. These mandates have been challenged in court; some have been halted or delayed. However, their costs and benefits have not been rigorously appraised. This study helps fill that gap. We estimate the direct costs and health-related benefits that would have accrued if these vaccination requirements had been implemented as intended. Compared with the January 2022 vaccination rates, we find that the mandates could have led to 15 million additional vaccinated individuals, increasing the overall proportion of the fully vaccinated U.S. population from 64% to 68%. The associated net benefits depend on the subsequent evolution of the pandemic-information unavailable ex ante to analysts or policymakers. In scenarios involving the emergence of a novel, more transmissible variant, against which vaccination and previous infection offer moderate protection, the estimated net benefits are potentially large. They reach almost $20,000 per additional vaccinated individual, with more than 20,000 total deaths averted over the 6-month period assessed. In scenarios involving a fading pandemic, existing vaccination-acquired or infection-acquired immunity provides sufficient protection, and the mandates' benefits are unlikely to exceed their costs. Thus, mandates may be most useful when the consequences of inaction are catastrophic. However, we do not compare the effects of mandates with alternative policies for increasing vaccination rates or for promoting other protective measures, which may receive stronger public support and be less likely to be overturned by litigation.

2.
J Benefit Cost Anal ; 13(2): 247-268, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1984308

ABSTRACT

Many economic analyses, including those that address the COVID-19 pandemic, focus on the value of averting deaths and do not include the value of averting nonfatal illnesses. Yet incorporating the value of averting nonfatal cases may change conclusions about the desirability of the policy. While per case values may be small, the number of nonfatal cases is often large, far outstripping the number of fatal cases. The value of averting nonfatal cases is also increasingly important in evaluating COVID-19 policy options as vaccine- and infection-related immunity and treatments reduce the case-fatality rate. Unfortunately, little valuation research is available that explicitly addresses COVID-19 morbidity. We describe and implement an approach for approximating the value of averting nonfatal illnesses or injuries and apply it to COVID-19 in the United States. We estimate gains from averting COVID-19 morbidity of about 0.01 quality-adjusted life year (QALY) per mild case averted, 0.02 QALY per severe case, and 3.15 QALYs per critical case. These gains translate into monetary values of about $5,300 per mild case, $11,000 per severe case, and $1.8 million per critical case. While these estimates are imprecise, they suggest the magnitude of the effects.

4.
Risk Anal ; 41(5): 761-770, 2021 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1221635

ABSTRACT

Numerous analyses of the benefits and costs of COVID-19 policies have been completed quickly as the crisis has unfolded. The results often largely depend on the approach used to value mortality risk reductions, typically expressed as the value per statistical life (VSL). Many analyses rely on a population-average VSL estimate; some adjust VSL for life expectancy at the age of death. We explore the implications of theory and empirical studies, which suggest that the relationship between age and VSL is uncertain. We compare the effects of three approaches: (1) an invariant population-average VSL; (2) a constant value per statistical life-year (VSLY); and (3) a VSL that follows an inverse-U pattern, peaking in middle age. We find that when applied to the U.S. age distribution of COVID-19 deaths, these approaches result in average VSL estimates of $10.63 million, $4.47 million, and $8.31 million. We explore the extent to which applying these estimates alters the conclusions of frequently cited analyses of social distancing, finding that they significantly affect the findings. However, these analyses do not address other characteristics of COVID-19 deaths that may increase or decrease the VSL estimates. Examples include the health status and income level of those affected, the size of the risk change, and the extent to which the risk is dreaded, uncertain, involuntarily incurred, and outside of one's control. The effects of these characteristics and their correlation with age are uncertain; it is unclear whether they amplify or diminish the effects of age on VSL.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Health Policy , Uncertainty , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , COVID-19/virology , Child , Child, Preschool , Humans , Infant , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL