Clinical and Economic Impact of Widespread Rapid Testing to Decrease SARS-CoV-2 Transmission.
medRxiv
; 2021 Feb 08.
Article
in English
| MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1388083
Preprint
This scientific journal article is probably based on a previously available preprint. It has been identified through a machine matching algorithm, human confirmation is still pending.
See preprint
This scientific journal article is probably based on a previously available preprint. It has been identified through a machine matching algorithm, human confirmation is still pending.
See preprint
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND:
The value of frequent, rapid testing to reduce community transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is poorly understood.OBJECTIVE:
To define performance standards and predict the clinical, epidemiological, and economic outcomes of nationwide, home-based, antigen testing.DESIGN:
A simple compartmental epidemic model estimated viral transmission, clinical history, and resource use, with and without testing. DATA SOURCES Parameter values and ranges informed by Centers for Disease Control guidance and published literature. TARGET POPULATION United States population. TIME HORIZON 60 days. PERSPECTIVE Societal. Costs include testing, inpatient care, and lost workdays. INTERVENTION Home-based SARS-CoV-2 antigen testing. OUTCOMEMEASURES:
Cumulative infections and deaths, numbers isolated and/or hospitalized, and total costs. RESULTS OF BASE-CASEANALYSIS:
Without a testing intervention, the model anticipates 15 million infections, 125,000 deaths, and $10.4 billion in costs ($6.5 billion inpatient; $3.9 billion lost productivity) over a 60-day horizon. Weekly availability of testing may avert 4 million infections and 19,000 deaths, raising costs by $21.5 billion. Lower inpatient outlays ($5.9 billion) would partially offset additional testing expenditures ($12.0 billion) and workdays lost ($13.9 billion), yielding incremental costs per infection (death) averted of $5,400 ($1,100,000). RESULTS OF SENSITIVITYANALYSIS:
Outcome estimates vary widely under different behavioral assumptions and testing frequencies. However, key findings persist across all scenarios large reductions in infections, mortality, and hospitalizations; and costs per death averted roughly an order of magnitude lower than commonly accepted willingness-to-pay values per statistical life saved ($5-17 million).LIMITATIONS:
Analysis restricted to at-home testing and limited by uncertainties about test performance.CONCLUSION:
High-frequency home testing for SARS-CoV-2 using an inexpensive, imperfect test could contribute to pandemic control at justifiable cost and warrants consideration as part of a national containment strategy.
Full text:
Available
Collection:
International databases
Database:
MEDLINE
Type of study:
Experimental Studies
/
Observational study
/
Prognostic study
Language:
English
Year:
2021
Document Type:
Article
Similar
MEDLINE
...
LILACS
LIS