Brief Cost Analysis of Surgical Personal Protective Equipment During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Published in: Themed Section: COVID-19, Volume 25, Issue 8, pages 1317–1320 (August 2022). doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2022.03.015

Posted on RAND.org on September 15, 2022

by Kandice A. Kapinos, Jordan R. Salley, Andrew Day

Read More

Access further information on this document at Themed Section: COVID-19

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

Objectives

This study aimed to compare the costs incurred and saved from universal use of N95 respirators with surgical masks for operating room providers in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods

We built a decision analytic model to compare direct medical costs of healthcare workers (HCWs) infected with COVID-19 during operating room procedures from expected transmission when using an N95 respirator relative to a surgical mask. We also examined quarantine costs.

Results

Results varied depending upon prevalence and false-negative rates of tests, but if N95 respirators reduce transmission by 2.8%, prevalence is at 1%, and testing yields 20% false negatives, providers should be willing to pay an additional $0.64 per HCW for the additional protection. Under this scenario, approximately 11 COVID-19 cases would be averted among HCWs per day.

Conclusions

Potential savings depend on disease prevalence, rate of asymptomatic patients with COVID-19, accuracy of testing, the marginal cost of respirators, and the quarantine period. We provide a range of calculations to show under which conditions N95 respirators are cost saving.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.