Dataset Information

Managing Coronavirus Disease 2019 Spread With Voluntary Public Health Measures: Sweden as a Case Study for Pandemic Control.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic has spread globally, causing extensive illness and mortality. In advance of effective antiviral therapies, countries have applied different public health strategies to control spread and manage healthcare need. Sweden has taken a unique approach of not implementing strict closures, instead urging personal responsibility. We analyze the results of this and other potential strategies for pandemic control in Sweden.

Methods

We implemented individual-based modeling of COVID-19 spread in Sweden using population, employment, and household data. Epidemiological parameters for COVID-19 were validated on a limited date range; where substantial uncertainties remained, multiple parameters were tested. The effects of different public health strategies were tested over a 160-day period, analyzed for their effects on intensive care unit (ICU) demand and death rate, and compared with Swedish data for April 2020.

Results

Swedish mortality rates are intermediate between rates for European countries that quickly imposed stringent public health controls and those for countries that acted later. Models most closely reproducing reported mortality data suggest that large portions of the population voluntarily self-isolate. Swedish ICU use rates remained lower than predicted, but a large fraction of deaths occurred in non-ICU patients. This suggests that patient prognosis was considered in ICU admission, reducing healthcare load at a cost of decreased survival in patients not admitted.

Conclusions

The Swedish COVID-19 strategy has thus far yielded a striking result: mild mandates overlaid with voluntary measures can achieve results highly similar to late-onset stringent mandates. However, this policy causes more healthcare demand and more deaths than early stringent control and depends on continued public will.

SUBMITTER: Kamerlin SCL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7337695 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Managing Coronavirus Disease 2019 Spread With Voluntary Public Health Measures: Sweden as a Case Study for Pandemic Control.

Kamerlin Shina C L SCL Kasson Peter M PM

Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America 20201201 12

<h4>Background</h4>The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic has spread globally, causing extensive illness and mortality. In advance of effective antiviral therapies, countries have applied different public health strategies to control spread and manage healthcare need. Sweden has taken a unique approach of not implementing strict closures, instead urging personal responsibility. We analyze the results of this and other potential strategies for pandemic control in Sweden.<h4>Methods</h4>We ...[more]

PMID: 32609825

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDiagnostic errors or delays can cause serious consequences for patient safety, especially in the emergency department. Anchoring bias is one of the major factors leading to diagnostic error. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the high probability of COVID-19 in febrile patients could be a major cause of anchoring bias leading to diagnostic error. In addition, certain evaluations such as auscultation are difficult to perform on a casual basis due to the increased risk of contact infection, which lead to inadequate assessment of the patients with valvular disease. Acute mitral regurgitation (MR) could be a fatal disease in the emergency department, especially if there is a diagnostic error or delay in diagnosis. It is often reported that diagnosis can be difficult even though there is no treatment other than emergent surgery. The diagnosis of acute MR has become more difficult because coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic could affect our daily practice especially in febrile patients. We report a case of a diagnostic delay of a febrile patient because of anchoring bias during the COVID-19 pandemic.Case presentationA 45-year-old man presented to the emergency department complaining of acute dyspnea and fever. Based on vital signs and computed tomography of the chest, acute pneumonia due to COVID-19 was suspected. Auscultation was avoided because of facility rule based on concern of contact infection. After admission to the intensive care unit, Doppler echocardiography revealed acute mitral regurgitation, and transesophageal echocardiography revealed mitral valve tendon rupture. After confirming the negative result for the polymerase chain reaction of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, mitral valvuloplasty was performed on the third day after admission. The patient was discharged 14 days after admission without complications.ConclusionsIn COVID-19 pandemic, anchoring bias suspecting COVID-19 among febrile patients becomes a strong heuristic factor. A thorough history and physical examination is still important in febrile patients presenting with dyspnea to ensure the correct diagnosis of acute mitral regurgitation.

Project description:The current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia pandemic, caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is spreading globally at an accelerated rate, with a basic reproduction number (R0) of 2-2.5, indicating that 2-3 persons will be infected from an index patient. A serious public health emergency, it is particularly deadly in vulnerable populations and communities in which healthcare providers are insufficiently prepared to manage the infection. As of March 16, 2020, there are more than 180,000 confirmed cases of COVID-19 worldwide, with more than 7000 related deaths. The SARS-CoV-2 virus has been isolated from asymptomatic individuals, and affected patients continue to be infectious 2 weeks after cessation of symptoms. The substantial morbidity and socioeconomic impact have necessitated drastic measures across all continents, including nationwide lockdowns and border closures. Pregnant women and their fetuses represent a high-risk population during infectious disease outbreaks. To date, the outcomes of 55 pregnant women infected with COVID-19 and 46 neonates have been reported in the literature, with no definite evidence of vertical transmission. Physiological and mechanical changes in pregnancy increase susceptibility to infections in general, particularly when the cardiorespiratory system is affected, and encourage rapid progression to respiratory failure in the gravida. Furthermore, the pregnancy bias toward T-helper 2 (Th2) system dominance, which protects the fetus, leaves the mother vulnerable to viral infections, which are more effectively contained by the Th1 system. These unique challenges mandate an integrated approach to pregnancies affected by SARS-CoV-2. Here we present a review of COVID-19 in pregnancy, bringing together the various factors integral to the understanding of pathophysiology and susceptibility, diagnostic challenges with real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) assays, therapeutic controversies, intrauterine transmission, and maternal-fetal complications. We discuss the latest options in antiviral therapy and vaccine development, including the novel use of chloroquine in the management of COVID-19. Fetal surveillance, in view of the predisposition to growth restriction and special considerations during labor and delivery, is addressed. In addition, we focus on keeping frontline obstetric care providers safe while continuing to provide essential services. Our clinical service model is built around the principles of workplace segregation, responsible social distancing, containment of cross-infection to healthcare providers, judicious use of personal protective equipment, and telemedicine. Our aim is to share a framework that can be adopted by tertiary maternity units managing pregnant women in the flux of a pandemic while maintaining the safety of the patient and healthcare provider at its core.

Project description:ImportanceThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has changed health care delivery worldwide. Although decreases in hospitalization for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) have been reported during the pandemic, the implication for in-hospital outcomes is not well understood.ObjectiveTo define changes in AMI case rates, patient demographics, cardiovascular comorbidities, treatment approaches, and in-hospital outcomes during the pandemic.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional study retrospectively analyzed AMI hospitalizations that occurred between December 30, 2018, and May 16, 2020, in 1 of the 49 hospitals in the Providence St Joseph Health system located in 6 states (Alaska, Washington, Montana, Oregon, California, and Texas). The cohort included patients aged 18 years or older who had a principal discharge diagnosis of AMI (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction [STEMI] or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction [NSTEMI]). Segmented regression analysis was performed to assess changes in weekly case volumes. Cases were grouped into 1 of 3 periods: before COVID-19 (December 30, 2018, to February 22, 2020), early COVID-19 (February 23, 2020, to March 28, 2020), and later COVID-19 (March 29, 2020, to May 16, 2020). In-hospital mortality was risk-adjusted using an observed to expected (O/E) ratio and covariate-adjusted multivariable model.ExposureDate of hospitalization.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was the weekly rate of AMI (STEMI or NSTEMI) hospitalizations. The secondary outcomes were patient characteristics, treatment approaches, and in-hospital outcomes of this patient population.ResultsThe cohort included 15 244 AMI hospitalizations (of which 4955 were for STEMI [33%] and 10 289 for NSTEMI [67%]) involving 14 724 patients (mean [SD] age of 68 [13] years and 10 019 men [66%]). Beginning February 23, 2020, AMI-associated hospitalizations decreased at a rate of -19.0 (95% CI, -29.0 to -9.0) cases per week for 5 weeks (early COVID-19 period). Thereafter, AMI-associated hospitalizations increased at a rate of +10.5 (95% CI, +4.6 to +16.5) cases per week (later COVID-19 period). No appreciable differences in patient demographics, cardiovascular comorbidities, and treatment approaches were observed across periods. The O/E mortality ratio for AMI increased during the early period (1.27; 95% CI, 1.07-1.48), which was disproportionately associated with patients with STEMI (1.96; 95% CI, 1.22-2.70). Although the O/E mortality ratio for AMI was not statistically different during the later period (1.23; 95% CI, 0.98-1.47), increases in the O/E mortality ratio were noted for patients with STEMI (2.40; 95% CI, 1.65-3.16) and after risk adjustment (odds ratio, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.02-2.26).Conclusions and relevanceThis cross-sectional study found important changes in AMI hospitalization rates and worse outcomes during the early and later COVID-19 periods. Future studies are needed to identify contributors to the increased mortality rate among patients with STEMI.

Dataset Information

Managing Coronavirus Disease 2019 Spread With Voluntary Public Health Measures: Sweden as a Case Study for Pandemic Control.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Managing Coronavirus Disease 2019 Spread With Voluntary Public Health Measures: Sweden as a Case Study for Pandemic Control.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure