Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Mar 8:13:211.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-13-211.

Economic analysis of pandemic influenza mitigation strategies for five pandemic severity categories

Affiliations

Economic analysis of pandemic influenza mitigation strategies for five pandemic severity categories

Joel K Kelso et al. BMC Public Health. .

Abstract

Background: The threat of emergence of a human-to-human transmissible strain of highly pathogenic influenza A(H5N1) is very real, and is reinforced by recent results showing that genetically modified A(H5N1) may be readily transmitted between ferrets. Public health authorities are hesitant in introducing social distancing interventions due to societal disruption and productivity losses. This study estimates the effectiveness and total cost (from a societal perspective, with a lifespan time horizon) of a comprehensive range of social distancing and antiviral drug strategies, under a range of pandemic severity categories.

Methods: An economic analysis was conducted using a simulation model of a community of ~30,000 in Australia. Data from the 2009 pandemic was used to derive relationships between the Case Fatality Rate (CFR) and hospitalization rates for each of five pandemic severity categories, with CFR ranging from 0.1% to 2.5%.

Results: For a pandemic with basic reproduction number R0 = 1.8, adopting no interventions resulted in total costs ranging from $441 per person for a pandemic at category 1 (CFR 0.1%) to $8,550 per person at category 5 (CFR 2.5%). For severe pandemics of category 3 (CFR 0.75%) and greater, a strategy combining antiviral treatment and prophylaxis, extended school closure and community contact reduction resulted in the lowest total cost of any strategy, costing $1,584 per person at category 5. This strategy was highly effective, reducing the attack rate to 5%. With low severity pandemics costs are dominated by productivity losses due to illness and social distancing interventions, whereas higher severity pandemic costs are dominated by healthcare costs and costs arising from productivity losses due to death.

Conclusions: For pandemics in high severity categories the strategies with the lowest total cost to society involve rigorous, sustained social distancing, which are considered unacceptable for low severity pandemics due to societal disruption and cost.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Overview of pandemic cost analysis methodology. Input parameters are shown on the left in boxes with blue text, with arrows indicating to which part of the cost analysis methodology they apply. Boxes with white text represent different processes of the methodology – each process is described in the Methods section under a subsection of the same name. Boxes with green text appearing at the bottom and on the right represent results generated by the analysis.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Idealised household and hub contact network.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Total cost of intervention strategies for 5 pandemic severity categories. Total pandemic cost for each severity category. Costs shown by colour coded columns according to pandemic severity, with cost per person in community shown on left axis. Intervention strategies are listed on horizontal axis. Attack rates (AR) for each strategy appear with each strategy label. Values are for a pandemic with unmitigated transmissibility of R0 = 1.8. Interventions abbreviated as: SC – school closure; CCR – 50% community contact reduction; WR – 50% workforce reduction; 4, 8 – intervention duration in weeks; cont – continuous duration; AV – antiviral treatment of diagnosed symptomatic cases and antiviral prophylaxis of household members of diagnosed symptomatic cases.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Breakdown of pandemic cost components. Breakdown of pandemic costs shown as horizontal bar, for each intervention strategy and each severity category. Coloured segments of each bar represent cost components as follows: (blue) health care; (red) antiviral drugs, including dispensing costs; (green) productivity losses due to illness and social distancing interventions; (purple) productivity losses due to deaths. Note that horizontal scale is different for each severity category. Values are for a pandemic with unmitigated transmissibility of R0 = 1.8. Interventions abbreviated as: SC – school closure; CCR – 50% community contact reduction; WR – 50% workforce reduction; 4, 8 – intervention duration in weeks; cont – continuous duration; AV – antiviral treatment of diagnosed symptomatic cases and antiviral prophylaxis of household members of diagnosed symptomatic cases.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Summary of key intervention strategies. Characteristics of key intervention strategies is given for pandemics of low severity (category 1, CFR < = 0.1%) and high severity (category 5, CFR > = 2.5%). Values are for a pandemic with unmitigated transmissibility of R0 = 1.8. Interventions abbreviated as: SC – school closure; CCR – 50% community contact reduction; WR – 50% workforce reduction; 4, 8 – intervention duration in weeks; cont – continuous duration; AV – antiviral treatment of diagnosed symptomatic cases and antiviral prophylaxis of household members of diagnosed symptomatic cases.

References

    1. ANZIC Influenza Investigators. Critical Care Services and 2009 H1N1 influenza in Australia and New Zealand. N Engl J Med. 2009;2009(361):1925–1934. - PubMed
    1. Nicoll A, Coulombier D. Europe’s initial experience with pandemic (H1N1) 2009 - mitigation and delaying policies and practices. Euro Surveill. 2009;14(29):pii=19279. - PubMed
    1. Donaldson LJ, Rutter PD, Ellis BM, Greaves FE, Mytton OT, Pebody RG, Yardley IE. Mortality from pandemic A/H1N1 2009 influenza in England: public health surveillance study. Br Med J. 2009;339:b5213. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b5213. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Halder N, Kelso J, Milne G. Analysis of the effectiveness of interventions used during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic. BMC Publ Health. 2010;10:168. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-10-168. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Halder N, Kelso J, Milne G. Developing guidelines for school closure interventions to be used during a future influenza pandemic. BMC Infect Dis. 2010;10(1):221. doi: 10.1186/1471-2334-10-221. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Substances