Productivity costs from a dengue episode in Asia: a systematic literature review
Rattachement africain : vn, us, gb, sg. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
BACKGROUND: Dengue is a mosquito-borne viral infection which has been estimated to cause a global economic burden of US$8.9 billion per year. 40% of this estimate was due to what are known as productivity costs (the costs associated with productivity loss from both paid and unpaid work that results from illness, treatment or premature death). Although productivity costs account for a significant proportion of the estimated economic burden of dengue, the methods used to calculate them are often very variable within health economic studies. The aim of this review was to systematically examine the current estimates of the productivity costs associated with dengue episodes in Asia and to increase awareness surrounding how productivity costs are estimated. METHOD: We searched PubMed and Web of Knowledge without date and language restrictions using terms related to dengue and cost and economics burden. The titles and abstracts of publications related to Asia were screened to identify relevant studies. The reported productivity losses and costs of non-fatal and fatal dengue episodes were then described and compared. Costs were adjusted for inflation to 2017 prices. RESULTS: We reviewed 33 relevant articles, of which 20 studies reported the productivity losses, and 31 studies reported productivity costs. The productivity costs varied between US$6.7-1445.9 and US$3.8-1332 for hospitalized and outpatient non-fatal episodes, respectively. The productivity cost associated with fatal dengue episodes varied between US$12,035-1,453,237. A large degree of this variation was due to the range of different countries being investigated and their corresponding economic status. However, estimates for a given country still showed notable variation. CONCLUSION: We found that the estimated productivity costs associated with dengue episodes in Asia are notable. However, owing to the significant variation in methodology and approaches applied, the reported productivity costs of dengue episodes were often not directly comparable across studies. More consistent and transparent methodology regarding the estimation of productivity costs would help the estimates of the economic burden of dengue be more accurate and comparable across studies.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Productivity costs from a dengue episode in Asia: a systematic literature review
- Date Crossref
- 03/06/2020
- Éditeur
- Springer Science and Business Media LLC
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Où se fait cette recherche
-
Oxford University Clinical Research Unit pays non établi dans la noticeStructure de recherche
-
Brandeis University Schneider Institutes for Health Policy pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
London Centre for Neglected Tropical Disease Research pays non établi dans la noticeStructure de recherche
-
Imperial College London pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Brighton and Sussex Medical School pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
National University of Singapore pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
University of Oxford Nuffield Department of Medicine pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
National University Health System pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
School of Public Health Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Department of Global Health and Infection pays non établi dans la noticeInstitution
Oxford University Clinical Research Unit, Schneider Institutes for Health Policy — Brandeis University et London Centre for Neglected Tropical Disease Research, avec 7 autres affiliations.
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.