Cited by 45Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeInfection Control and VentilationCOVID-19 epidemiological studies

Cost-effectiveness and return on investment of protecting health workers in low- and middle-income countries during the COVID-19 pandemic

Open access
Risko, Nicholas, Werner, Kalin, Offorjebe, O. Agatha, Vecino-Ortiz, Andres I., Wallis, Lee A., Razzak, Junaid·2020·PLOS ONE

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In this paper, we predict the health and economic consequences of immediate investment in personal protective equipment (PPE) for health care workers (HCWs) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). METHODS: To account for health consequences, we estimated mortality for HCWs and present a cost-effectiveness and return on investment (ROI) analysis using a decision-analytic model with Bayesian multivariate sensitivity analysis and Monte Carlo simulation. Data sources included inputs from the World Health Organization Essential Supplies Forecasting Tool and the Imperial College of London epidemiologic model. RESULTS: An investment of $9.6 billion USD would adequately protect HCWs in all LMICs. This intervention would save 2,299,543 lives across LMICs, costing $59 USD per HCW case averted and $4,309 USD per HCW life saved. The societal ROI would be $755.3 billion USD, the equivalent of a 7,932% return. Regional and national estimates are also presented. DISCUSSION: In scenarios where PPE remains scarce, 70-100% of HCWs will get infected, irrespective of nationwide social distancing policies. Maintaining HCW infection rates below 10% and mortality below 1% requires inclusion of a PPE scale-up strategy as part of the pandemic response. In conclusion, wide-scale procurement and distribution of PPE for LMICs is an essential strategy to prevent widespread HCW morbidity and mortality. It is cost-effective and yields a large downstream return on investment.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0240503

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Risko, N., Werner, K., Offorjebe, O. A., Vecino-Ortiz, A. I., Wallis, L. A., & Razzak, J.
Affiliations
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • University of Cape Town (ZA)
  • University of Southern California (US)
Corresponding author
Risko, Nicholas
Venue
PLOS ONE
Published
2020-10-09
Volume
15
Issue
10
Pages
e0240503
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3091870652
Cited by
45
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 4
FWCI
7.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • medRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Informationszentrum Lebenswissenschaften (ZB MED) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Infection Control and Ventilation
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Modeling and Simulation › COVID-19 epidemiological studies
Keywords
personal protective equipment, healthcare workers, COVID-19 pandemic, low- and middle-income countries, cost-effectiveness, return on investment, social distancing, pandemic response, economic burden of infection
MeSH terms
Personal Protective Equipment, Betacoronavirus, COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Bayes Theorem, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Developing Countries, Health Workforce, Health Personnel, Humans, Monte Carlo Method, Pneumonia, Viral, Coronavirus Infections, Pandemics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review