Economic Benefits of COVID-19 Screening Tests

Abstract

We assess the economic value of screening testing programs as a policy response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. We find that the fiscal, macroeconomic, and health benefits of rapid SARS-CoV-2 screening testing programs far exceed their costs, with the ratio of economic benefits to costs typically in the range of 4-15 (depending on program details), not counting the monetized value of lives saved. Unless the screening test is highly specific, however, the signal value of the screening test alone is low, leading to concerns about adherence. Confirmatory testing increases the net economic benefits of screening tests by reducing the number of healthy workers in quarantine and by increasing adherence to quarantine measures. The analysis is undertaken using a behavioral SIR model for the United States with 5 age groups, 66 economic sectors, screening and diagnostic testing, and partial adherence to instructions to quarantine or to isolate.

Clinical and Economic Effects of Widespread Rapid Testing to Decrease SARS-CoV-2 Transmission

“…Our findings confirm those of other investigators that home-based rapid testing can have a dramatic effect in reducing transmission and COVID-19 mortality at a justifiable cost, 1,32 with testing frequency a key component to why this broad testing strategy is so effective. Factors currently in play that could worsen the pandemic -a slow start to roll out of widespread vaccination, "pandemic fatigue" regarding social distancing and mask wearing, and emergence of variants that are more easily transmissible -only underscore the importance of frequent rapid testing as a strategy to reduce the number of new cases.…”

“…One strategy receiving less formal attention is the high-frequency use of low-cost, rapid, home-based antigen testing for SARS-CoV-2 with self-enforced isolation for those who obtain a positive result. [1][2][3][4][5] Advocates point to the potential advantages: prevention by isolation; focusing on "infectiousness" rather than "infection"; and reducing strain on laboratories that must conduct viral polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-based diagnostic testing. [6][7][8] Critics note that such an approach risks poor uptake and adherence, frequent false negatives leading to unfounded reassurance, and frequent false positives resulting in needless isolation and lost work productivity.…”

Covid-19 Surveillance Testing and Resident Outcomes in Nursing Homes

“… 3 , 7 Such studies have also suggested limited benefit from using tests with greater sensitivity for detecting SARS-CoV-2. 7 , 10 The findings of our current real-world study largely support the conclusions of the modeling studies.…”

Optimal test allocation

“…Bergemann et al (2018) study incentive compatibility in a market for information. Atkeson et al (2020) point out in the context of COVID-19 testing that the precision of the post-test posterior information enhances compliance with quarantine measures.…”