Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Nonpharmaceutical Interventions Combined with Inactivated Vaccination and Oral Medicine in China
Value in Health ; 26(6 Supplement):S63, 2023.
Artículo en Inglés | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-20235707
ABSTRACT

Objectives:

Various interventions were used to control the COVID-19 pandemic and protect population health, including vaccination, medication and nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). This study aims to examine the cost-effectiveness of different combinations of NPIs (including social distancing, mask wearing, tracing-testing-isolation, mass testing, and lockdown), oral medicine (Paxlovid), and vaccination (including two-dose and three-dose vaccination) under the Delta and Omicron pandemic in China. Method(s) We constructed a Markov model using a SIRI structure with a one-week cycle length over one-year time horizon to estimate the cost-effectiveness of different combinations in China from societal perspective. Effectiveness of interventions, disease transition probabilities and costs were from published data, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) and net monetary benefits were calculated for one-year time horizon. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the model. Scenario analysis was developed to examine different situations under the Omicron pandemic. Result(s) Under the Delta pandemic, implementing the combination of social distancing, mask wearing, mass testing and three-dose vaccination was the optimal strategy, with cost at $11165635.33 and utility of 94309.94 QALYs, and had 60% probability of being cost-effective compared with other strategies. Three-dose vaccination combinations were better than two-dose combinations. Under the Omicron pandemic, antigen testing was better than nucleic testing by avoiding cross infections;second, adding Paxlovid or lockdown to the combined intervention strategies could increase limited health outcomes at huge cost and thus were not cost-effective;last, encouraging patients to stay at home can save societal costs compared with concentrated quarantine at hospitals. Conclusion(s) Three-dose vaccination and self-quarantine of asymptomatic and mild cases can save total costs. Under the Omicron pandemic outbreak, antigen testing is a better way to control the pandemic, and adding Paxlovid or lockdown to intervention combinations is not cost-effective.Copyright © 2023
Palabras clave

Texto completo: Disponible Colección: Bases de datos de organismos internacionales Base de datos: EMBASE Tipo de estudio: Estudio experimental / Estudio observacional / Ensayo controlado aleatorizado Tópicos: Vacunas / Variantes Idioma: Inglés Revista: Value in Health Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Artículo

Similares

MEDLINE

...
LILACS

LIS


Texto completo: Disponible Colección: Bases de datos de organismos internacionales Base de datos: EMBASE Tipo de estudio: Estudio experimental / Estudio observacional / Ensayo controlado aleatorizado Tópicos: Vacunas / Variantes Idioma: Inglés Revista: Value in Health Año: 2023 Tipo del documento: Artículo