IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aphecp/v20y2022i5d10.1007_s40258-022-00749-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Economic Evaluation of Government-Funded COVID-19 Testing in Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Jonathan Karnon

    (Flinders University)

  • Hossein Haji Ali Afzali

    (Flinders University)

  • Billie Bonevski

    (Flinders University)

Abstract

Objective Easy and equitable access to testing has been a cornerstone of the public health response to COVID-19. Currently in Australia, testing using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests for COVID-19 is free to the user, but government funding for rapid antigen tests (RATs) is limited. We conduct an economic analysis of alternative government policies regarding the funding of COVID-19 testing in Australia. Methods A decision tree model was developed to describe COVID-19 testing pathways for the Australian population over a 1-week period. The model outputs were analysed to estimate R numbers associated with alternative funding policies, which were used to estimate COVID-19 cases over a 6-month time horizon. Healthcare costs and quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) effects were applied to new COVID-19 cases. The model was populated using responses to a de novo population survey and published data sources. Results Compared with no government-funded COVID-19 testing, government-funded testing is estimated to generate large incremental net monetary benefits (INMBs), up to A$15 billion in the base-case analyses. Government-funded PCR testing and RATs for all is predicted to maximise INMBs in most tested scenarios, though funding RATs for all and not PCR tests has similar INMBs in many scenarios and generates higher benefits to costs ratios. Conclusions Our interpretation of the modelled analysis is that at the time of writing (July 2022), with high vaccination uptake in Australia and few other public health measures in place, Australian governments should consider reducing funding of PCR testing, for example, limiting capacity to essential workers and individuals with known risk factors for serious symptoms, and fund RATs for all.

Suggested Citation

  • Jonathan Karnon & Hossein Haji Ali Afzali & Billie Bonevski, 2022. "An Economic Evaluation of Government-Funded COVID-19 Testing in Australia," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 20(5), pages 681-691, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:20:y:2022:i:5:d:10.1007_s40258-022-00749-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s40258-022-00749-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40258-022-00749-6
    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/s40258-022-00749-6?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. Laura Catherine Edney & Hossein Haji Ali Afzali & Terence Chai Cheng & Jonathan Karnon, 2018. "Estimating the Reference Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio for the Australian Health System," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 239-252, February.
    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. Jisoo A Kwon & Georgina M Chambers & Fabio Luciani & Lei Zhang & Shamin Kinathil & Dennis Kim & Hla-Hla Thein & Willings Botha & Sandra Thompson & Andrew Lloyd & Lorraine Yap & Richard T Gray & Tony B, 2021. "Hepatitis C treatment strategies in prisons: A cost-effectiveness analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(2), pages 1-13, February.
    2. Siverskog, Jonathan & Henriksson, Martin, 2022. "The health cost of reducing hospital bed capacity," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 313(C).
    3. James Lomas & Jessica Ochalek & Rita Faria, 2022. "Avoiding Opportunity Cost Neglect in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Health Technology Assessment," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 13-18, January.
    4. Si Si & John Moss & Jonathan Karnon & Nigel Stocks, 2018. "Cost-effectiveness evaluation of the 45-49 year old health check versus usual care in Australian general practice: A modelling study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(11), pages 1-14, November.
    5. 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.
    6. Cathrine Mihalopoulos & Yong Yi Lee & Lidia Engel & Long Khanh‐Dao Le & Eng Joo Tan & Mary Lou Chatterton, 2021. "The Productivity Commission Inquiry Report into Mental Health—A Commentary from a Health Economics Perspective," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 54(1), pages 119-129, March.
    7. Simon Walker & Susan Griffin & Miqdad Asaria & Aki Tsuchiya & Mark Sculpher, 2019. "Striving for a Societal Perspective: A Framework for Economic Evaluations When Costs and Effects Fall on Multiple Sectors and Decision Makers," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 17(5), pages 577-590, October.
    8. Werner Brouwer & Pieter Baal & Job Exel & Matthijs Versteegh, 2019. "When is it too expensive? Cost-effectiveness thresholds and health care decision-making," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(2), pages 175-180, March.
    9. Christopher McCabe, 2019. "Expanding the Scope of Costs and Benefits for Economic Evaluations in Health: Some Words of Caution," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 37(4), pages 457-460, April.
    10. Niek Stadhouders & Xander Koolman & Christel van Dijk & Patrick Jeurissen & Eddy Adang, 2019. "The marginal benefits of healthcare spending in the Netherlands: Estimating cost‐effectiveness thresholds using a translog production function," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(11), pages 1331-1344, November.
    11. James Lomas & Stephen Martin & Karl Claxton, 2018. "Estimating the marginal productivity of the English National Health Service from 2003/04 to 2012/13," Working Papers 158cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    12. Dan Cai & Si Shi & Shan Jiang & Lei Si & Jing Wu & Yawen Jiang, 2022. "Estimation of the cost-effective threshold of a quality-adjusted life year in China based on the value of statistical life," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(4), pages 607-615, June.
    13. Jonathan Siverskog & Martin Henriksson, 2019. "Estimating the marginal cost of a life year in Sweden’s public healthcare sector," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(5), pages 751-762, July.
    14. Claxton, Karl & Asaria, Miqdad & Chansa, Collins & Jamison, Julian & Lomas, James & Ochalek, Jessica & Paulden, Mike, 2019. "Accounting for Timing when Assessing Health-Related Policies," Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(S1), pages 73-105, April.
    15. Rachael Taylor & Deborah Sullivan & Penny Reeves & Nicola Kerr & Amy Sawyer & Emma Schwartzkoff & Andrew Bailey & Christopher Williams & Alexis Hure, 2023. "A Scoping Review of Economic Evaluations to Inform the Reorientation of Preventive Health Services in Australia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(12), pages 1-47, June.

    More about this item

    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:aphecp:v:20:y:2022:i:5:d:10.1007_s40258-022-00749-6. 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.