Higher Post-Acute Health Care Costs Following SARS-CoV-2 Infection Among Adults in Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose and Introduction: Growing evidence suggests SARS-CoV-2 infection increases the risk of long term cardiovascular, neurological, and other effects. However, post-acute health care costs following SARS-CoV-2 infection are not known. Patients and Statistical Methods: Beginning 56 days following SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing, we compared person-specific total and component health care costs (2020 CAD$) for the first year of follow-up at the mean and 99 th percentiles of health care costs for matched test-positive and test-negative adults in Ontario, Canada, between January 1, 2020, and March 31, 2021. Matching included demographics, baseline clinical characteristics, and two-week time blocks. Results: For 531,182 people, mean person-specific total health care costs were $513.83 (95% CI $387.37-$638.40) higher for test-positive females and $459.10 (95% CI $304.60-$615.32) higher for test-positive males, which were driven by hospitalization, long-term care, and complex continuing care costs. At the 99 th percentile of each subgroup, person-specific health care costs were $12,533.00 (95% CI $9008.50-$16,473.00) higher for test-positive females and $14,604.00 (95% CI $9565.50-$19,506.50) for test-positive males, driven by hospitalization, specialist (males), and homecare costs (females). Cancer costs were lower. Six-month and 1-year cost differences were similar. Conclusion: Post-acute health care costs after a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test were significantly higher than matched test-negative individuals, and these increased costs persisted for at least one year. The largest increases health care costs came from hospitalizations, long-term care, complex continuing care, followed by outpatient specialists (for males) and homecare costs (for women). Given the magnitude of ongoing viral spread, policymakers, clinicians, and patients should be aware of higher post-acute health care costs following SARS-CoV-2 infection. Plain Language Summary: We examined differences in health care costs for people who had a positive PCR for SARS-CoV-2 in Ontario, Canada, starting 56 days after the positive test at looking forward at least 1 year, matched by > 20 characteristics to people with a negative PCR within two weeks. During the study, the average health care costs per person were approximately $4800 (2020 CAD$). We found that on average, health care costs were $513.83 higher (2020 CAD$; +11% higher than average health care costs) for women who had a positive PCR test and $459.10 higher (+10% higher than average health care costs) for men who had a positive PCR test. Most of the increased costs were due to hospitalization, long-term care, and complex continuing care costs. When we looked at people who had the highest health care costs (the 99 th percentile), health care costs for women with a positive PCR test were $12,533.00 higher (+261% higher than average health care costs) and $14,604.00 higher for men (+304% higher than average health care costs), with higher costs driven by hospitalization, specialist (males), and homecare costs (females). Cancer costs were lower for people with a positive test. In summary, post-acute health care costs were higher for people who had a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test, after accounting for multiple patient-level factors. Higher costs persisted for a least one year of follow-up. Keywords: long COVID, health policy, sex differences
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".