Cost-effectiveness of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) testing and isolation strategies in nursing homes

Sarah M. Bartsch,Colleen Weatherwax,Marie F. Martinez,Kevin L. Chin,Michael R. Wasserman,Raveena D. Singh,Jessie L. Heneghan,Gabrielle M. Gussin,Sheryl A. Scannell,Cameron White,Bruce Leff,Susan S. Huang,Bruce Y. Lee
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/ice.2024.9
2024-02-17
Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology
Abstract:Objective: Nursing home residents may be particularly vulnerable to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Therefore, a question is when and how often nursing homes should test staff for COVID-19 and how this may change as severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) evolves. Design: We developed an agent-based model representing a typical nursing home, COVID-19 spread, and its health and economic outcomes to determine the clinical and economic value of various screening and isolation strategies and how it may change under various circumstances. Results: Under winter 2023–2024 SARS-CoV-2 omicron variant conditions, symptom-based antigen testing averted 4.5 COVID-19 cases compared to no testing, saving 990 from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services perspective, 57,155 from the societal perspective. Testing did not return sufficient positive health effects to make it cost-effective [ 31,906 per QALY) or cost saving (saving ≤$18,372) when the severe outcome risk was ≥3 times higher than that of current omicron variants. Conclusions: SARS-CoV-2 testing costs outweighed benefits under winter 2023–2024 conditions; however, testing became cost-effective with increasingly severe clinical outcomes. Cost-effectiveness can change as the epidemic evolves because it depends on clinical severity and other intervention use. Thus, nursing home administrators and policy makers should monitor and evaluate viral virulence and other interventions over time.
infectious diseases,public, environmental & occupational health
What problem does this paper attempt to address?