Economic Evaluation of Influenza Pandemic Mitigation Strategies in the United States Using a Stochastic Microsimulation Transmission Model
Article first published online: 30 JUL 2008
© 2008, International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR)
Value in Health
Volume 12, Issue 2, pages 226–233, March/April 2009
How to Cite
Sander, B., Nizam, A., Garrison, L. P., Postma, M. J., Halloran, M. E. and Longini, I. M. (2009), Economic Evaluation of Influenza Pandemic Mitigation Strategies in the United States Using a Stochastic Microsimulation Transmission Model. Value in Health, 12: 226–233. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00437.x
- Issue published online: 17 FEB 2009
- Article first published online: 30 JUL 2008
- computer simulation;
- cost–benefit analysis;
- human disease outbreaks;
- pharmaceutical models;
Objectives: To project the potential economic impact of pandemic influenza mitigation strategies from a societal perspective in the United States.
Methods: We use a stochastic agent-based model to simulate pandemic influenza in the community. We compare 17 strategies: targeted antiviral prophylaxis (TAP) alone and in combination with school closure as well as prevaccination.
Results: In the absence of intervention, we predict a 50% attack rate with an economic impact of $187 per capita as loss to society. Full TAP (FTAP) is the most effective single strategy, reducing number of cases by 54% at the lowest cost to society ($127 per capita). Prevaccination reduces number of cases by 48% and is the second least costly alternative ($140 per capita). Adding school closure to FTAP or prevaccination further improves health outcomes but increases total cost to society by approximately $2700 per capita.
Conclusion: FTAP is an effective and cost-saving measure for mitigating pandemic influenza.