Cost effectiveness of three arbovirus surveillance methods in northern California

We compared the cost effectiveness of enzootic arbovirus surveillance in northern California by antibody detection in sentinel chickens, virus isolation from mosquitoes, and antibody detection in wild avian hosts. Total and annual recurring costs were determined for each method based on estimated personnel and actual material and travel costs for biweekly surveillance at 3 sites in the Sacramento Valley from May 1 through mid-October 1997 and 1998. Serologic detection of antibodies in wild birds was the most expensive method. Total costs associated with sentinel chickens and mosquitoes combined were less than half of those for the wild bird program. Recurring annual costs for the wild bird and mosquito methods were only slightly less than expenses for those methods during the 1st year of operation, which included nonrecurring setup costs. Recurring costs for sentinel chickens were reduced approximately 40% from total costs during the 1st year of the program and were <14% of recurring costs for wild bird serology. Exceptions and caveats of our analysis are discussed. When considering data from a companion paper on detection of enzootic virus transmission using the 3 methods, we concluded that the current system that combines sentinel chickens and virus isolation from mosquitoes is the most cost-effective and efficient surveillance program and should be retained. Future research efforts should investigate the costs and surveillance efficiency of modifications in the frequency of specimen collection and the placement of chicken flocks and mosquito traps.