Exploring equity in health and poverty impacts of control measures for SARS-CoV-2 in six countries

Background: Policy makers need to be rapidly informed about the potential equity consequences of different COVID-19 strategies, alongside their broader health and economic impacts. While there are complex models to inform both potential health and macro-economic impact, there are few tools available to rapidly assess potential equity impacts of interventions.Methods: We created an economic model to simulate the impact of lockdown measures in Pakistan, Georgia, Chile, UK, the Philippines and South Africa. We consider impact of lockdown in terms of ability to socially distance, and income loss during lockdown, and tested the impact of assumptions on social protection coverage in a scenario analysis.Results: In all examined countries, socioeconomic status (SES) quintiles 1-3 were disproportionately more likely to experience income loss (70% of people) and inability to socially distance (68% of people) than higher SES quintiles. Improving social protection increased the percentage of the workforce able to socially distance from 48% (33%-60%) to 66% (44%-71%). We estimate the cost of this social protection would be equivalent to an average of 0.6% gross domestic product (0.1% Pakistan-1.1% Chile).Conclusions: We illustrate the potential for using publicly available data to rapidly assess the equity implications of social protection and non-pharmaceutical intervention policy. Social protection is likely to mitigate inequitable health and economic impacts of lockdown. Although social protection is usually targeted to the poorest, middle quintiles will likely also need support as they are most likely to suffer income losses and are disproportionately more exposed

Quantifying long-term health and economic outcomes for survivors of group B Streptococcus invasive disease in infancy: protocol of a multi-country study in Argentina, India, Kenya, Mozambique and South Africa

Sepsis and meningitis due to invasive group B Streptococcus (iGBS) disease during early infancy is a leading cause of child mortality. Recent systematic estimates of the worldwide burden of GBS suggested that there are 319,000 cases of infant iGBS disease each year, and an estimated 147,000 stillbirths and young-infant deaths, with the highest burden occurring in Sub-Saharan Africa. The following priority data gaps were highlighted: (1) long-term outcome data after infant iGBS, including mild disability, to calculate quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) or disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) and (2) economic burden for iGBS survivors and their families. Geographic data gaps were also noted with few studies from low- and middle- income countries (LMIC), where the GBS burden is estimated to be the highest. In this paper we present the protocol for a multi-country matched cohort study designed to estimate the risk of long-term neurodevelopmental impairment (NDI), socioemotional behaviors, and economic outcomes for children who survive invasive GBS disease in Argentina, India, Kenya, Mozambique, and South Africa. Children will be identified from health demographic surveillance systems, hospital records, and among participants of previous epidemiological studies. The children will be aged between 18 months to 17 years. A tablet-based custom-designed application will be used to capture data from direct assessment of the child and interviews with the main caregiver. In addition, a parallel sub-study will prospectively measure the acute costs of hospitalization due to neonatal sepsis or meningitis, irrespective of underlying etiology. In summary, these data are necessary to characterize the consequences of iGBS disease and enable the advancement of effective strategies for survivors to reach their developmental and economic potential. In particular, our study will inform the development of a full public health value proposition on maternal GBS immunization that is being coordinated by the World Health Organization

The potential cost-effectiveness of next generation influenza vaccines in England and Wales: a modelling analysis

Next generation influenza vaccines are in development and have the potential for widespread health and economic benefits. Determining the potential health and economic impact for these vaccines is needed to drive investment in bringing these vaccines to the market, and to inform which groups public health policies on influenza vaccination should target. We used a mathematical modelling approach to estimate the epidemiological impact and cost-effectiveness of next generation influenza vaccines in England and Wales. We used data from an existing fitted model, and evaluated new vaccines with different characteristics ranging from improved vaccines with increased efficacy duration and breadth of protection, to universal vaccines, defined in line with the World Health Organisation (WHO) Preferred Product Characteristics (PPC). We calculated the cost effectiveness of new vaccines in comparison to the current seasonal vaccination programme. We calculated and compared the Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio and Incremental Net Monetary Benefit for each new vaccine type. All analysis was conducted in R. We show that next generation influenza vaccines may result in a 21% to 77% reduction in influenza infections, dependent on vaccine characteristics. Our economic modelling shows that using any of these next generation vaccines at 2019 coverage levels would be highly cost-effective at a willingness to pay threshold of £20,000 for a range of vaccine prices. The vaccine threshold price for the best next generation vaccines in £-2019 is £230 (95%CrI £192 - £269) per dose, but even minimally-improved influenza vaccines could be priced at £18 (95%CrI £16 - £21) per dose and still remain cost-effective. This evaluation demonstrates the promise of next generation influenza vaccines for impact on influenza epidemics, and likely cost-effectiveness profiles. We have provided evidence towards a full value of vaccines assessment which bolsters the investment case for development and roll-out of next-generation influenza vaccines

COVID-19 length of hospital stay: a systematic review and data synthesis.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has placed an unprecedented strain on health systems, with rapidly increasing demand for healthcare in hospitals and intensive care units (ICUs) worldwide. As the pandemic escalates, determining the resulting needs for healthcare resources (beds, staff, equipment) has become a key priority for many countries. Projecting future demand requires estimates of how long patients with COVID-19 need different levels of hospital care. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of early evidence on length of stay (LoS) of patients with COVID-19 in hospital and in ICU. We subsequently developed a method to generate LoS distributions which combines summary statistics reported in multiple studies, accounting for differences in sample sizes. Applying this approach, we provide distributions for total hospital and ICU LoS from studies in China and elsewhere, for use by the community. RESULTS: We identified 52 studies, the majority from China (46/52). Median hospital LoS ranged from 4 to 53 days within China, and 4 to 21 days outside of China, across 45 studies. ICU LoS was reported by eight studies-four each within and outside China-with median values ranging from 6 to 12 and 4 to 19 days, respectively. Our summary distributions have a median hospital LoS of 14 (IQR 10-19) days for China, compared with 5 (IQR 3-9) days outside of China. For ICU, the summary distributions are more similar (median (IQR) of 8 (5-13) days for China and 7 (4-11) days outside of China). There was a visible difference by discharge status, with patients who were discharged alive having longer LoS than those who died during their admission, but no trend associated with study date. CONCLUSION: Patients with COVID-19 in China appeared to remain in hospital for longer than elsewhere. This may be explained by differences in criteria for admission and discharge between countries, and different timing within the pandemic. In the absence of local data, the combined summary LoS distributions provided here can be used to model bed demands for contingency planning and then updated, with the novel method presented here, as more studies with aggregated statistics emerge outside China

Health effects of routine measles vaccination and supplementary immunisation activities in 14 high-burden countries: a Dynamic Measles Immunization Calculation Engine (DynaMICE) modelling study

Background: WHO recommends at least 95% population coverage with two doses of measles-containing vaccine (MCV). Most countries worldwide use routine services to offer a first dose of measles-containing vaccine (MCV1) and later, a second dose of measles-containing vaccine (MCV2). Many countries worldwide conduct supplementary immunisation activities (SIAs), offering vaccination to all people in a specific age range irrespective of previous vaccination history. We aimed to estimate the relative effects of each dose and delivery route in 14 countries with high measles burden. Methods: We used an age-structured compartmental dynamic model, the Dynamic Measles Immunization Calculation Engine (DynaMICE), to assess the effects of different vaccination strategies on measles susceptibility and burden during 2000–20 in 14 countries with high measles incidence (containing 53% of the global birth cohort and 78% of the global measles burden). Country-specific routine MCV1 and MCV2 coverage data during 1980–2020 were obtained from the WHO and UNICEF Estimates of National Immunization Coverage database for all modelled countries and SIA data were obtained from the WHO summary of measles and rubella SIAs. We estimated the incremental health effects of different vaccination strategies using prevented cases of measles and deaths from measles and their efficiency using the incremental number needed to vaccinate (NNV) to prevent an additional measles case. Findings: Compared with no vaccination, MCV1 implementation was estimated to have prevented 824 million cases of measles and 9·6 million deaths from measles, with a median NNV of 1·41 (IQR 1·35–1·44). Adding routine MCV2 to MCV1 was estimated to have prevented 108 million cases and 404 270 deaths, whereas adding SIAs to MCV1 was estimated to have prevented 256 million cases and 4·4 million deaths. Despite larger incremental effects, adding SIAs to MCV1 (median incremental NNV 6·02, 5·30–7·68) showed reduced efficiency compared with adding routine MCV2 (5·41, 4·76–6·11). Interpretation: Vaccination strategies, including non-selective SIAs, reach a greater proportion of children who are unvaccinated and reduce measles burden more than MCV2 alone, but efficiency is lower because of the wide age range targeted by SIAs. This analysis provides information to help improve the health effects and efficiency of measles vaccination strategies. The interplay between MCV1, MCV2, and SIAs should be considered when planning future measles vaccination strategies. Funding: Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

The impact of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on health systems and household resources in Africa and South Asia

AbstractBackgroundCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemics strain health systems and households. Health systems in Africa and South Asia may be particularly at risk due to potential high prevalence of risk factors for severe disease, large household sizes and limited healthcare capacity.MethodsWe investigated the impact of an unmitigated COVID-19 epidemic on health system resources and costs, and household costs, in Karachi, Delhi, Nairobi, Addis Ababa and Johannesburg. We adapted a dynamic model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission and disease to capture country-specific demography and contact patterns. The epidemiological model was then integrated into an economic framework that captured city-specific health systems and household resource use.FindingsThe cities severely lack intensive care beds, healthcare workers and financial resources to meet demand during an unmitigated COVID-19 epidemic. A highly mitigated COVID-19 epidemic, under optimistic assumptions, may avoid overwhelming hospital bed capacity in some cities, but not critical care capacity.InterpretationViable mitigation strategies encompassing a mix of responses need to be established to expand healthcare capacity, reduce peak demand for healthcare resources, minimise progression to critical care and shield those at greatest risk of severe disease.FundingBill &amp; Melinda Gates Foundation, European Commission, National Institute for Health Research, Department for International Development, Wellcome Trust, Royal Society, Research Councils UK.Research in contextEvidence before this studyWe conducted a PubMed search on May 5, 2020, with no language restrictions, for studies published since inception, combining the terms (“cost” OR “economic”) AND “covid”. Our search yielded 331 articles, only two of which reported estimates of health system costs of COVID-19. The first study estimated resource use and medical costs for COVID-19 in the United States using a static model of COVID 19. The second study estimated the costs of polymerase chain reaction tests in the United States. We found no studies examining the economic implications of COVID-19 in low- or middle-income settings.Added value of this studyThis is the first study to use locally collected data in five cities (Karachi, Delhi, Nairobi, Addis Ababa and Johannesburg) to project the healthcare resource and health economic implications of an unmitigated COVID-19 epidemic. Besides the use of local data, our study moves beyond existing work to (i) consider the capacity of health systems in key cities to cope with this demand, (ii) consider healthcare staff resources needed, since these fall short of demand by greater margins than hospital beds, and (iii) consider economic costs to health services and households.Implications of all the evidenceDemand for ICU beds and healthcare workers will exceed current capacity by orders of magnitude, but the capacity gap for general hospital beds is narrower. With optimistic assumptions about disease severity, the gap between demand and capacity for general hospital beds can be closed in some, but not all the cities. Efforts to bridge the economic burden of disease to households are needed.</jats:sec

Systematic Review on the Acute Cost-of-illness of Sepsis and Meningitis in Neonates and Infants.

BACKGROUND: Sepsis and meningitis in neonates and infants are a source of substantial morbidity, mortality and economic loss. The objective of this review is to estimate the acute costs associated with treating sepsis, meningitis and meningococcal septicemia, in neonates and infants, worldwide. METHODS: The electronic databases Medline, Embase and EconLit were searched and exported on November 24, 2018. Studies that reported an average hospitalization cost for confirmed cases of sepsis, meningitis or meningococcal septicemia were eligible for our review. Descriptive data were extracted and reported costs were inflated and converted. A narrative synthesis of the costs was conducted. RESULTS: Our review identified 20 studies reporting costs of sepsis, meningitis and/or meningococcal septicemia. Costs ranged from $55 to$129,632 for sepsis and from $222 to$33,635 for meningitis (in 2017 US dollars). One study estimated the cost of meningococcal septicemia to be $56,286. All reported costs were estimated from the perspective of the healthcare provider or payer. Most studies were from the United States, which also had the highest costs. Only a few studies were identified for low- and middle-income countries, which reported lower costs than high-income countries for both sepsis and meningitis. CONCLUSIONS: Sepsis and meningitis in neonates and infants are associated with substantial costs to the healthcare system and showed a marked difference across global income groups. However, more research is needed to inform costs in low- and middle-income settings and to understand the economic costs borne by families and wider society

Routine childhood immunisation during the COVID-19 pandemic in Africa: a benefit-risk analysis of health benefits versus excess risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

BACKGROUND: National immunisation programmes globally are at risk of suspension due to the severe health system constraints and physical distancing measures in place to mitigate the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to compare the health benefits of sustaining routine childhood immunisation in Africa with the risk of acquiring severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection through visiting routine vaccination service delivery points. METHODS: We considered a high-impact scenario and a low-impact scenario to approximate the child deaths that could be caused by immunisation coverage reductions during COVID-19 outbreaks. In the high-impact scenario, we used previously reported country-specific child mortality impact estimates of childhood immunisation for diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, hepatitis B, Haemophilus influenzae type b, Streptococcus pneumoniae, rotavirus, measles, meningitis A, rubella, and yellow fever to approximate the future deaths averted before 5 years of age by routine childhood vaccination during a 6-month COVID-19 risk period without catch-up campaigns. In the low-impact scenario, we approximated the health benefits of sustaining routine childhood immunisation on only the child deaths averted from measles outbreaks during the COVID-19 risk period. We assumed that contact-reducing interventions flattened the outbreak curve during the COVID-19 risk period, that 60% of the population will have been infected by the end of that period, that children can be infected by either vaccinators or during transport, and that upon child infection the whole household will be infected. Country-specific household age structure estimates and age-dependent infection-fatality rates were applied to calculate the number of deaths attributable to the vaccination clinic visits. We present benefit-risk ratios for routine childhood immunisation, with 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs) from a probabilistic sensitivity analysis. FINDINGS: In the high-impact scenario, for every one excess COVID-19 death attributable to SARS-CoV-2 infections acquired during routine vaccination clinic visits, 84 (95% UI 14-267) deaths in children could be prevented by sustaining routine childhood immunisation in Africa. The benefit-risk ratio for the vaccinated children is 85 000 (4900-546 000), for their siblings (60 years) is 96 (14-307). In the low-impact scenario that approximates the health benefits to only the child deaths averted from measles outbreaks, the benefit-risk ratio to the households of vaccinated children is 3 (0-10); if the risk to only the vaccinated children is considered, the benefit-risk ratio is 3000 (182-21 000). INTERPRETATION: The deaths prevented by sustaining routine childhood immunisation in Africa outweigh the excess risk of COVID-19 deaths associated with vaccination clinic visits, especially for the vaccinated children. Routine childhood immunisation should be sustained in Africa as much as possible, while considering other factors such as logistical constraints, staff shortages, and reallocation of resources during the COVID-19 pandemic. FUNDING: Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance; Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

Estimation of country-level incidence of early-onset invasive Group B Streptococcus disease in infants using Bayesian methods.

Neonatal invasive disease caused by Group B Streptococcus (GBS) is responsible for much acute mortality and long-term morbidity. To guide development of better prevention strategies, including maternal vaccines that protect neonates against GBS, it is necessary to estimate the burden of this condition globally and in different regions. Here, we present a Bayesian model that estimates country-specific invasive GBS (iGBS) disease incidence in children aged 0 to 6 days. The model combines different types of epidemiological data, each of which has its own limitations: GBS colonization prevalence in pregnant women, risk of iGBS disease in children born to GBS-colonized mothers and direct estimates of iGBS disease incidence where available. In our analysis, we present country-specific maternal GBS colonization prevalence after adjustment for GBS detection assay used in epidemiological studies. We then integrate these results with other epidemiological data and estimate country-level incidence of iGBS disease including in countries with no studies that directly estimate incidence. We are able to simultaneously estimate two key epidemiological quantities: the country-specific incidence of early-onset iGBS disease, and the risk of iGBS disease in babies born to GBS-colonized women. Overall, we believe our method will contribute to a more comprehensive quantification of the global burden of this disease, inform cost-effectiveness assessments of potential maternal GBS vaccines and identify key areas where data are necessary