Lessons from past pandemics: a systematic review of evidence-based, cost-effective interventions to suppress COVID-19.
Lessons from past pandemics: a systematic review of evidence-based, cost-effective interventions to suppress COVID-19.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s13643-022-01958-9
复制
发表时间：
2022-05-12
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
Potvin, Louise
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Juneau, Carl-Etienne;Pueyo, Tomas;Bell, Matt;Gee, Genevieve;Collazzo, Pablo;Potvin, Louise
关键词：
在新冠肺炎大流行期间，90个国家做出了无与伦比的全球反应，要求39亿人留在家里。然而，其他国家避免了封锁，转而专注于其他策略，比如追踪接触者。这些策略的效果和成本效益如何？我们的目标是全面总结过去大流行控制的证据，重点放在成本效益上。根据PRISMA指南，使用与大流行控制相关的一系列术语搜索MEDLINE(1946年至2020年4月2日)和EMBASE(1974年至2020年4月17日)。报告至少一种干预措施的有效性或成本效益的文章包括在内。我们找到了1653篇论文；其中包括62篇论文。洗手和口罩的有效性得到了随机试验的支持。这些措施具有很高的成本效益。对于其他干预措施，只发现了观察性和模型性研究。他们建议：(1)最具成本效益的干预措施是快速追踪接触者和病例隔离、监测网络、医护人员的防护设备和早期疫苗接种(如果有)；(2)家庭隔离和储存抗病毒药物成本较低；(3)工作场所和学校关闭等社会疏远措施有效但成本较高，使其成为成本效益最低的选择；(4)组合干预措施比单一干预措施更具成本效益；以及(5)早期采用的干预措施更具成本效益。对于2009年H1N1流感，接触者追踪的成本效益估计是学校关闭的4363倍(每例预防死亡的费用分别为2260美元和9860,000美元)。对于新冠肺炎来说，谨慎的解读表明，(1)关闭工作场所和学校是有效的，但代价高昂，特别是在较晚采取的情况下，以及(2)尽早扩大干预措施的组合，包括洗手、口罩，为医务人员提供充足的防护装备，以及快速接触者追踪和病例隔离可能是最具成本效益的策略。网上版载有补充材料，可在10.1186/s13643-022-01958-9查阅。
In an unparalleled global response, during the COVID-19 pandemic, 90 countries asked 3.9 billion people to stay home. Yet other countries avoided lockdowns and focused on other strategies, like contact tracing. How effective and cost-effective are these strategies? We aimed to provide a comprehensive summary of the evidence on past pandemic controls, with a focus on cost-effectiveness. Following PRISMA guidelines, MEDLINE (1946 to April week 2, 2020) and EMBASE (1974 to April 17, 2020) were searched using a range of terms related to pandemic control. Articles reporting on the effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of at least one intervention were included. We found 1653 papers; 62 were included. The effectiveness of hand-washing and face masks was supported by randomized trials. These measures were highly cost-effective. For other interventions, only observational and modelling studies were found. They suggested that (1) the most cost-effective interventions are swift contact tracing and case isolation, surveillance networks, protective equipment for healthcare workers, and early vaccination (when available); (2) home quarantines and stockpiling antivirals are less cost-effective; (3) social distancing measures like workplace and school closures are effective but costly, making them the least cost-effective options; (4) combinations are more cost-effective than single interventions; and (5) interventions are more cost-effective when adopted early. For 2009 H1N1 influenza, contact tracing was estimated to be 4363 times more cost-effective than school closure ($2260 vs. $9,860,000 per death prevented). For COVID-19, a cautious interpretation suggests that (1) workplace and school closures are effective but costly, especially when adopted late, and (2) scaling up as early as possible a combination of interventions that includes hand-washing, face masks, ample protective equipment for healthcare workers, and swift contact tracing and case isolation is likely to be the most cost-effective strategy. The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13643-022-01958-9.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.1146/annurev-economics-080511-110944
发表时间：
2012-01-01
期刊：
ANNUAL REVIEW OF ECONOMICS, VOL 4
影响因子：
--
作者：
Banks, James;Smith, James P.
通讯作者：
Smith, James P.
影响因子：
5.5
作者：
Bendavid E;Oh C;Bhattacharya J;Ioannidis JPA
通讯作者：
Ioannidis JPA
DOI：
10.1016/s2213-2600(21)00286-1
发表时间：
2021-12
期刊：
The Lancet. Respiratory medicine
影响因子：
--
作者：
Adeloye D;Elneima O;Daines L;Poinasamy K;Quint JK;Walker S;Brightling CE;Siddiqui S;Hurst JR;Chalmers JD;Pfeffer PE;Novotny P;Drake TM;Heaney LG;Rudan I;Sheikh A;De Soyza A;International COVID-19 Airways Diseases Group
通讯作者：
International COVID-19 Airways Diseases Group
影响因子：
29.9
作者：
Haug, Nils;Geyrhofer, Lukas;Klimek, Peter
通讯作者：
Klimek, Peter
影响因子：
2.6
作者：
Buonomo, Bruno;Messina, Eleonora
通讯作者：
Messina, Eleonora