Dataset Information

Effectiveness of isolation, testing, contact tracing, and physical distancing on reducing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in different settings: a mathematical modelling study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The isolation of symptomatic cases and tracing of contacts has been used as an early COVID-19 containment measure in many countries, with additional physical distancing measures also introduced as outbreaks have grown. To maintain control of infection while also reducing disruption to populations, there is a need to understand what combination of measures-including novel digital tracing approaches and less intensive physical distancing-might be required to reduce transmission. We aimed to estimate the reduction in transmission under different control measures across settings and how many contacts would be quarantined per day in different strategies for a given level of symptomatic case incidence.

Methods

For this mathematical modelling study, we used a model of individual-level transmission stratified by setting (household, work, school, or other) based on BBC Pandemic data from 40 162 UK participants. We simulated the effect of a range of different testing, isolation, tracing, and physical distancing scenarios. Under optimistic but plausible assumptions, we estimated reduction in the effective reproduction number and the number of contacts that would be newly quarantined each day under different strategies.

Results

We estimated that combined isolation and tracing strategies would reduce transmission more than mass testing or self-isolation alone: mean transmission reduction of 2% for mass random testing of 5% of the population each week, 29% for self-isolation alone of symptomatic cases within the household, 35% for self-isolation alone outside the household, 37% for self-isolation plus household quarantine, 64% for self-isolation and household quarantine with the addition of manual contact tracing of all contacts, 57% with the addition of manual tracing of acquaintances only, and 47% with the addition of app-based tracing only. If limits were placed on gatherings outside of home, school, or work, then manual contact tracing of acquaintances alone could have an effect on transmission reduction similar to that of detailed contact tracing. In a scenario where 1000 new symptomatic cases that met the definition to trigger contact tracing occurred per day, we estimated that, in most contact tracing strategies, 15 000-41 000 contacts would be newly quarantined each day.

Interpretation

Consistent with previous modelling studies and country-specific COVID-19 responses to date, our analysis estimated that a high proportion of cases would need to self-isolate and a high proportion of their contacts to be successfully traced to ensure an effective reproduction number lower than 1 in the absence of other measures. If combined with moderate physical distancing measures, self-isolation and contact tracing would be more likely to achieve control of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 transmission.

Funding

Wellcome Trust, UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, European Commission, Royal Society, Medical Research Council.

SUBMITTER: Kucharski AJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7511527 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The WHO recommended intervention of Directly Observed Treatment, Short-course (DOTS) appears to have been less successful than expected in reducing the burden of TB in some high prevalence settings. One strategy for enhancing DOTS is incorporating active case-finding through screening contacts of TB patients as widely used in low-prevalence settings. Predictive models that incorporate population-level effects on transmission provide one means of predicting impacts of such interventions. We aim to identify all TB transmission modelling studies addressing contact tracing and to describe and critically assess their modelling assumptions, parameter choices and relevance to policy. We searched MEDLINE, SCOPUS, COMPENDEX, Google Scholar and Web of Science databases for relevant English language publications up to February 2012. Of the 1285 studies identified, only 5 studies met our inclusion criteria of models of TB transmission dynamics in human populations designed to incorporate contact tracing as an intervention. Detailed implementation of contact processes was only present in two studies, while only one study presented a model for a high prevalence, developing world setting. Some use of relevant data for parameter estimation was made in each study however validation of the predicted impact of interventions was not attempted in any of the studies. Despite a large body of literature on TB transmission modelling, few published studies incorporate contact tracing. There is considerable scope for future analyses to make better use of data and to apply individual based models to facilitate more realistic patterns of infectious contact. Combined with a focus on high burden settings this would greatly increase the potential for models to inform the use of contract tracing as a TB control policy. Our findings highlight the potential for collaborative work between clinicians, epidemiologists and modellers to gather data required to enhance model development and validation and hence better inform future public health policy.

Project description:BackgroundIn most countries, contacts of confirmed COVID-19 cases are asked to quarantine for 14 days after exposure to limit asymptomatic onward transmission. While theoretically effective, this policy places a substantial social and economic burden on both the individual and wider society, which might result in low adherence and reduced policy effectiveness. We aimed to assess the merit of testing contacts to avert onward transmission and to replace or reduce the length of quarantine for uninfected contacts.MethodsWe used an agent-based model to simulate the viral load dynamics of exposed contacts, and their potential for onward transmission in different quarantine and testing strategies. We compared the performance of quarantines of differing durations, testing with either PCR or lateral flow antigen (LFA) tests at the end of quarantine, and daily LFA testing without quarantine, against the current 14-day quarantine strategy. We also investigated the effect of contact tracing delays and adherence to both quarantine and self-isolation on the effectiveness of each strategy.FindingsAssuming moderate levels of adherence to quarantine and self-isolation, self-isolation on symptom onset alone can prevent 37% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 12-56) of onward transmission potential from secondary cases. 14 days of post-exposure quarantine reduces transmission by 59% (95% UI 28-79). Quarantine with release after a negative PCR test 7 days after exposure might avert a similar proportion (54%, 95% UI 31-81; risk ratio [RR] 0·94, 95% UI 0·62-1·24) to that of the 14-day quarantine period, as would quarantine with a negative LFA test 7 days after exposure (50%, 95% UI 28-77; RR 0·88, 0·66-1·11) or daily testing without quarantine for 5 days after tracing (50%, 95% UI 23-81; RR 0·88, 0·60-1·43) if all tests are returned negative. A stronger effect might be possible if individuals isolate more strictly after a positive test and if contacts can be notified faster.InterpretationTesting might allow for a substantial reduction in the length of, or replacement of, quarantine with a small excess in transmission risk. Decreasing test and trace delays and increasing adherence will further increase the effectiveness of these strategies. Further research is required to empirically evaluate the potential costs (increased transmission risk, false reassurance) and benefits (reduction in the burden of quarantine, increased adherence) of such strategies before adoption as policy.FundingNational Institute for Health Research, UK Research and Innovation, Wellcome Trust, EU Horizon 2021, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Project description:BackgroundUnderstanding the overall effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions to control the COVID-19 pandemic and reduce the burden of disease is crucial for future pandemic planning. However, quantifying the effectiveness of specific control measures and the extent of missed infections, in the absence of early large-scale serological surveys or random community testing, has remained challenging.MethodsCombining data on notified local COVID-19 cases with known and unknown sources of infections in Singapore with a branching process model, we reconstructed the incidence of missed infections during the early phase of the wild-type SARS-CoV-2 and Delta variant transmission. We then estimated the relative effectiveness of border control measures, case finding and contact tracing when there was no or low vaccine coverage in the population. We compared the risk of ICU admission and death between the wild-type SARS-CoV-2 and the Delta variant in notified cases and all infections.ResultsWe estimated strict border control measures were associated with 0.2 (95% credible intervals, CrI 0.04-0.8) missed imported infections per notified case between July and December 2020, a decline from around 1 missed imported infection per notified case in the early phases of the pandemic. Contact tracing was estimated to identify 78% (95% CrI 62-93%) of the secondary infections generated by notified cases before the partial lockdown in Apr 2020, but this declined to 63% (95% CrI 56-71%) during the lockdown and rebounded to 78% (95% CrI 58-94%) during reopening in Jul 2020. The contribution of contact tracing towards overall outbreak control also hinges on ability to find cases with unknown sources of infection: 42% (95% CrI 12-84%) of such cases were found prior to the lockdown; 10% (95% CrI 7-15%) during the lockdown; 47% (95% CrI 17-85%) during reopening, due to increased testing capacity and health-seeking behaviour. We estimated around 63% (95% CrI 49-78%) of the wild-type SARS-CoV-2 infections were undetected during 2020 and around 70% (95% CrI 49-91%) for the Delta variant in 2021.ConclusionsCombining models with case linkage data enables evaluation of the effectiveness of different components of outbreak control measures, and provides more reliable situational awareness when some cases are missed. Using such approaches for early identification of the weakest link in containment efforts could help policy makers to better redirect limited resources to strengthen outbreak control.

Project description:ObjectivesThis study quantified how the efficiency of testing and contact tracing impacts the spread of COVID-19. The average time interval between infection and quarantine, whether asymptomatic cases are tested or not, and initial delays to beginning a testing and tracing programme were investigated.SettingWe developed a novel individual-level network model, called CoTECT (Testing Efficiency and Contact Tracing model for COVID-19), using key parameters from recent studies to quantify the impacts of testing and tracing efficiency. The model distinguishes infection from confirmation by integrating a 'T' compartment, which represents infections confirmed by testing and quarantine. The compartments of presymptomatic (E), asymptomatic (I), symptomatic (Is), and death with (F) or without (f) test confirmation were also included in the model. Three scenarios were evaluated in a closed population of 3000 individuals to mimic community-level dynamics. Real-world data from four Nordic countries were also analysed.Primary and secondary outcome measuresSimulation result: total/peak daily infections and confirmed cases, total deaths (confirmed/unconfirmed by testing), fatalities and the case fatality rate. Real-world analysis: confirmed cases and deaths per million people.Results(1) Shortening the duration between Is and T from 12 to 4 days reduces infections by 85.2% and deaths by 88.8%. (2) Testing and tracing regardless of symptoms reduce infections by 35.7% and deaths by 46.2% compared with testing only symptomatic cases. (3) Reducing the delay to implementing a testing and tracing programme from 50 to 10 days reduces infections by 35.2% and deaths by 44.6%. These results were robust to sensitivity analysis. An analysis of real-world data showed that tests per case early in the pandemic are critical for reducing confirmed cases and the fatality rate.ConclusionsReducing testing delays will help to contain outbreaks. These results provide policymakers with quantitative evidence of efficiency as a critical value in developing testing and contact tracing strategies.