IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/eujhec/v24y2023i4d10.1007_s10198-022-01500-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reducing the basic reproduction number of COVID-19: a model simulation focused on QALYs, hospitalisation, productivity costs and optimal (soft) lockdown

Author

Listed:
  • Jose Robles-Zurita

    (Health Economics and Health Technology Assessment, School of Health & Wellbeing, University of Glasgow
    HCD Economics)

Abstract

Even if public health interventions are successful at reducing the spread of COVID-19, there is no guarantee that they will bring net benefits to the society because of the dynamic nature of the pandemic, e.g., the risk of a second outbreak if those interventions are stopped too early, and the costs of a continued lockdown. In this analysis, a discrete-time dynamic model is used to simulate the effect of reducing the effective reproduction number, driven by lockdowns ordered in March 2020 in four European countries (UK, France, Italy and Spain), on QALYs and hospitalisation costs. These benefits are valued in monetary terms (€30,000 per QALY assumed) and compared to productivity costs due to reduced economic activity during the lockdown. An analysis of the optimal duration of lockdown is performed where a net benefit is maximised. The switch to a soft lockdown is analysed and compared to a continued lockdown or no intervention. Results vary for two assumptions about hospital capacity of the health system: (a) under unlimited capacity, average benefit ranges from 8.21 to 14.21% of annual GDP, for UK and Spain, respectively; (b) under limited capacity, average benefits are higher than 30.32% of annual GDP in all countries. The simulation results imply that the benefits of lockdown are not substantial unless continued until vaccination of high-risk groups is complete. It is illustrated that lockdown may not bring net benefits under some scenarios and a soft lockdown will be a more efficient alternative from mid-June 2020 only if the basic reproduction number is maintained low (not necessarily below 1) and productivity costs are sufficiently reduced.

Suggested Citation

  • Jose Robles-Zurita, 2023. "Reducing the basic reproduction number of COVID-19: a model simulation focused on QALYs, hospitalisation, productivity costs and optimal (soft) lockdown," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(4), pages 647-659, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:24:y:2023:i:4:d:10.1007_s10198-022-01500-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s10198-022-01500-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10198-022-01500-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10198-022-01500-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pinto-Prades, Jose Luis & Loomes, Graham & Brey, Raul, 2009. "Trying to estimate a monetary value for the QALY," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 553-562, May.
    2. Sebastian Neumann-Böhme & Nirosha Elsem Varghese & Iryna Sabat & Pedro Pita Barros & Werner Brouwer & Job Exel & Jonas Schreyögg & Tom Stargardt, 2020. "Once we have it, will we use it? A European survey on willingness to be vaccinated against COVID-19," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(7), pages 977-982, September.
    3. Layard, Richard & Clark, Andrew E. & De Neve, Jan-Emmanuel & Krekel, Christian & Fancourt, Daisy & Hey, Nancy & O'Donnell, Gus, 2020. "When to release the lockdown: a wellbeing framework for analysing costs and benefits," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 104276, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Layard, Richard & Clark, Andrew E. & De Neve, Jan-Emmanuel & Krekel, Christian & Fancourt, Daisy & Hey, Nancy & O'Donnell, Gus, 2020. "When to release the lockdown: a wellbeing framework for analysing costs and benefits," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 104276, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Briggs, Andrew & Sculpher, Mark & Claxton, Karl, 2006. "Decision Modelling for Health Economic Evaluation," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198526629.
    6. Helen Mason & Michael Jones‐Lee & Cam Donaldson, 2009. "Modelling the monetary value of a QALY: a new approach based on UK data," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(8), pages 933-950, August.
    7. Thunström, Linda & Newbold, Stephen C. & Finnoff, David & Ashworth, Madison & Shogren, Jason F., 2020. "The Benefits and Costs of Using Social Distancing to Flatten the Curve for COVID-19," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 11(2), pages 179-195, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Brodeur, Abel & Clark, Andrew E. & Fleche, Sarah & Powdthavee, Nattavudh, 2021. "COVID-19, lockdowns and well-being: Evidence from Google Trends," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    2. Wolter H. J. Hassink & Guyonne Kalb & Jordy Meekes, 2020. "The Dutch labour market early on in the COVID-19 outbreak: Regional coronavirus hotspots and the national lockdown," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2020n17, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    3. Eiji Yamamura & Yoshiro Tsustsui, 2021. "School closures and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 34(4), pages 1261-1298, October.
    4. Andrew E. Clark & Conchita D’Ambrosio & Anthony Lepinteur, 2021. "The fall in income inequality during COVID-19 in four European countries," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 19(3), pages 489-507, September.
    5. Ryen, Linda & Svensson, Mikael, 2014. "The Willingness to Pay for a QALY: a Review of the Empirical Literature," Karlstad University Working Papers in Economics 12, Karlstad University, Department of Economics.
    6. Andrew E. Clark & Anthony Lepinteur, 2022. "Pandemic Policy and Life Satisfaction in Europe," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 68(2), pages 393-408, June.
    7. Wolter H. J. Hassink & Guyonne Kalb & Jordy Meekes, 2021. "Regional Coronavirus Hotspots During the COVID-19 Outbreak in the Netherlands," De Economist, Springer, vol. 169(2), pages 127-140, May.
    8. Strong, Peter & Shenvi, Aditi & Yu, Xuewen & Papamichail, K. Nadia & Wynn, Henry P. & Smith, Jim Q., 2023. "Building a Bayesian decision support system for evaluating COVID-19 countermeasure strategies," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113632, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Timothy Besley & Nicholas Stern, 2020. "The Economics of Lockdown," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 493-513, September.
    10. Arthur E. Attema & Marieke Krol & Job Exel & Werner B. F. Brouwer, 2018. "New findings from the time trade-off for income approach to elicit willingness to pay for a quality adjusted life year," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 19(2), pages 277-291, March.
    11. Claxton, Karl & Asaria, Miqdad & Chansa, Collins & Jamison, Julian & Lomas, James & Ochalek, Jessica & Paulden, Mike, 2019. "Accounting for timing when assessing health-related policies," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 100038, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Joan Costa‐Font & Sarah Fleche & Ricardo Pagan, 2024. "The welfare effects of time reallocation: evidence from Daylight Saving Time," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 91(362), pages 547-568, April.
    13. Jaldell Henrik, 2013. "Cost-benefit analyses of sprinklers in nursing homes for elderly," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, De Gruyter, vol. 4(2), pages 209-235, August.
    14. Graeme Auld & Steven Bernstein & Benjamin Cashore & Kelly Levin, 2021. "Managing pandemics as super wicked problems: lessons from, and for, COVID-19 and the climate crisis," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(4), pages 707-728, December.
    15. S. Olofsson & U.-G. Gerdtham & L. Hultkrantz & U. Persson, 2018. "Measuring the end-of-life premium in cancer using individual ex ante willingness to pay," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 19(6), pages 807-820, July.
    16. Linda Ryen & Mikael Svensson, 2015. "The Willingness to Pay for a Quality Adjusted Life Year: A Review of the Empirical Literature," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(10), pages 1289-1301, October.
    17. Henrik Andersson & James K. Hammitt & Kristian Sundström, 2015. "Willingness to Pay and QALYs: What Can We Learn about Valuing Foodborne Risk?," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(3), pages 727-752, September.
    18. YAMAMURA, Eiji & Tsutsui, Yoshiro, 2020. "Impact of closing schools on mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: Evidence using panel data from Japan," MPRA Paper 105023, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. John F. Helliwell & David Gyarmati & Craig Joyce & Heather Orpana, 2020. "Building an Epidemiology of Happiness," NBER Working Papers 28095, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. James Banks & Xiaowei Xu, 2020. "The Mental Health Effects of the First Two Months of Lockdown during the COVID‐19 Pandemic in the UK," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 685-708, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    COVID-19; Lockdown; QALYs; Hospitalisation; Productivity costs;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:eujhec:v:24:y:2023:i:4:d:10.1007_s10198-022-01500-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.