Matt Boyd1, Osman D Mansoor2, Michael G Baker3, Nick Wilson3. 1. Adapt Research Ltd, New Zealand. 2. Public Health Physician, New Zealand. 3. Department of Public Health, University of Otago, New Zealand.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To perform a comprehensive economic evaluation of border closure for an island nation in the face of severe pandemic scenarios. METHODS: The costing tool developed by the New Zealand (NZ) Treasury (CBAx) was used for the analyses. Pandemic scenarios were as per previous work;1 epidemiological data were from past New Zealand influenza pandemics. RESULTS: The net present value of successful border closure was NZ$7.86 billion for Scenario A (half the mortality rate of the 1918 influenza pandemic) and $144 billion for preventing a more severe pandemic (10 times the mortality of scenario A). Cost-utility analyses found border closure was relatively cost-effective, at $14,400 per QALY gained in Scenario A, and cost-saving for Scenario B (taking the societal perspective). CONCLUSIONS: This work quantifies the economic benefits and costs from border closure for New Zealand under specific assumptions in a generic but severe pandemic threat (e.g. influenza, synthetic bioweapon). Preparing for such a pandemic response seems wise for an island nation, although successful border closure may only be feasible if planned well ahead. Implications for public health: Policy makers responsible for generic pandemic planning should explore how border closure could be implemented, including practical and legal frameworks.
OBJECTIVE: To perform a comprehensive economic evaluation of border closure for an island nation in the face of severe pandemic scenarios. METHODS: The costing tool developed by the New Zealand (NZ) Treasury (CBAx) was used for the analyses. Pandemic scenarios were as per previous work;1 epidemiological data were from past New Zealand influenza pandemics. RESULTS: The net present value of successful border closure was NZ$7.86 billion for Scenario A (half the mortality rate of the 1918 influenza pandemic) and $144 billion for preventing a more severe pandemic (10 times the mortality of scenario A). Cost-utility analyses found border closure was relatively cost-effective, at $14,400 per QALY gained in Scenario A, and cost-saving for Scenario B (taking the societal perspective). CONCLUSIONS: This work quantifies the economic benefits and costs from border closure for New Zealand under specific assumptions in a generic but severe pandemic threat (e.g. influenza, synthetic bioweapon). Preparing for such a pandemic response seems wise for an island nation, although successful border closure may only be feasible if planned well ahead. Implications for public health: Policy makers responsible for generic pandemic planning should explore how border closure could be implemented, including practical and legal frameworks.
Authors: Ani Movsisyan; Jacob Burns; Renke Biallas; Michaela Coenen; Karin Geffert; Olaf Horstick; Irma Klerings; Lisa Maria Pfadenhauer; Peter von Philipsborn; Kerstin Sell; Brigitte Strahwald; Jan M Stratil; Stephan Voss; Eva Rehfuess Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-04-09 Impact factor: 2.692