Dataset Information

The effect of multiple interventions to balance healthcare demand for controlling COVID-19 outbreaks: a modelling study.

ABSTRACT: For controlling recent COVID-19 outbreaks around the world, many countries have implemented suppression and mitigation interventions. This work aims to conduct a feasibility study for accessing the effect of multiple interventions to control the COVID-19 breakouts in the UK and other European countries, accounting for balance of healthcare demand. The model is to infer the impact of mitigation, suppression and multiple rolling interventions for controlling COVID-19 outbreaks in the UK, with two features considered: direct link between exposed and recovered population, and practical healthcare demand by separation of infections. We combined the calibrated model with COVID-19 data in London and non-London regions in the UK during February and April 2020. Our finding suggests that rolling intervention is an optimal strategy to effectively control COVID-19 outbreaks in the UK for balancing healthcare demand and morality ratio. It is better to implement regional based interventions with varied intensities and maintenance periods. We suggest an intervention strategy named as "Besieged and rolling interventions" to the UK that take a consistent suppression in London for 100 days and 3 weeks rolling intervention in other regions. This strategy would reduce the overall infections and deaths of COVID-19 outbreaks, and balance healthcare demand in the UK.

SUBMITTER: Yang P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7862317 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The effect of multiple interventions to balance healthcare demand for controlling COVID-19 outbreaks: a modelling study.

Yang Po P Yang Geng G Qi Jun J Sheng Bin B Yang Yun Y Zhang Shuhao S Bi Gaoshan G Mao Xuxin X

Scientific reports 20210204 1

For controlling recent COVID-19 outbreaks around the world, many countries have implemented suppression and mitigation interventions. This work aims to conduct a feasibility study for accessing the effect of multiple interventions to control the COVID-19 breakouts in the UK and other European countries, accounting for balance of healthcare demand. The model is to infer the impact of mitigation, suppression and multiple rolling interventions for controlling COVID-19 outbreaks in the UK, with two ...[more]

PMID: 33542294

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe world is experiencing local/regional hotspots and spikes in the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which causes COVID-19 disease. We aimed to formulate an applicable epidemiological model to accurately predict and forecast the impact of local outbreaks of COVID-19 to guide the local healthcare demand and capacity, policy-making and public health decisions.MethodsThe model utilized the aggregated daily COVID-19 situation reports (including counts of daily admissions, discharges and bed occupancy) from the local National Health Service (NHS) hospitals and COVID-19-related weekly deaths in hospitals and other settings in Sussex (population 1.7 million), Southeast England. These data sets corresponded to the first wave of COVID-19 infections from 24 March to 15 June 2020. A novel epidemiological predictive and forecasting model was then derived based on the local/regional surveillance data. Through a rigorous inverse parameter inference approach, the model parameters were estimated by fitting the model to the data in an optimal sense and then subsequent validation.ResultsThe inferred parameters were physically reasonable and matched up to the widely used parameter values derived from the national data sets by Biggerstaff M, Cowling BJ, Cucunubá ZM et al. (Early insights from statistical and mathematical modeling of key epidemiologic parameters of COVID-19, Emerging infectious diseases. 2020;26(11)). We validate the predictive power of our model by using a subset of the available data and comparing the model predictions for the next 10, 20 and 30 days. The model exhibits a high accuracy in the prediction, even when using only as few as 20 data points for the fitting.ConclusionsWe have demonstrated that by using local/regional data, our predictive and forecasting model can be utilized to guide the local healthcare demand and capacity, policy-making and public health decisions to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on the local population. Understanding how future COVID-19 spikes/waves could possibly affect the regional populations empowers us to ensure the timely commissioning and organization of services. The flexibility of timings in the model, in combination with other early-warning systems, produces a time frame for these services to prepare and isolate capacity for likely and potential demand within regional hospitals. The model also allows local authorities to plan potential mortuary capacity and understand the burden on crematoria and burial services. The model algorithms have been integrated into a web-based multi-institutional toolkit, which can be used by NHS hospitals, local authorities and public health departments in other regions of the UK and elsewhere. The parameters, which are locally informed, form the basis of predicting and forecasting exercises accounting for different scenarios and impacts of COVID-19 transmission.

Project description:BackgroundThe 'third wave' of COVID-19 in Hong Kong, China was suppressed by non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). Although social distancing regulations were quickly strengthened, the outbreak continued to grow, causing increasing delays in tracing and testing. Further regulations were introduced, plus 'targeted testing' services for at-risk groups. Estimating the impact of individual NPIs could provide lessons about how outbreaks can be controlled without radical lockdown. However, the changing delays in confirmation time challenge current modelling methods. We used a novel approach aimed at disentangling and quantifying the effects of individual interventions.MethodsWe incorporated the causes of delays in tracing and testing (i.e. load-efficiency relationship) and the consequences from such delays (i.e. the proportion of un-traced cases and the proportion of traced-cases with confirmation delay) into a deterministic transmission model, which was fitted to the daily number of cases with and without an epi‑link (an indication of being contact-traced). The effect of each NPI was then calculated.FindingsThe model estimated that after earlier relaxation of regulations, Re rose from 0.7 to 3.2. Restoration of social distancing to the previous state only reduced Re to 1.3, because of increased delay in confirmation caused by load on the contact-tracing system. However, Re decreased by 20.3% after the introduction of targeted testing and by 17.5% after extension of face-mask rules, reducing Re to 0.9 and suppressing the outbreak. The output of the model without incorporation of delay failed to capture important features of transmission and Re.InterpretationChanging delay in confirmation has a significant impact on disease transmission and estimation of transmissibility. This leads to a clear recommendation that delay should be monitored and mitigated during outbreaks, and that delay dynamics should be incorporated into models to assess the effects of NPIs.FundingCity University of Hong Kong and Health and Medical Research Fund.

Project description:BackgroundNon-pharmaceutical interventions have been implemented to reduce transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in the UK. Projecting the size of an unmitigated epidemic and the potential effect of different control measures has been crucial to support evidence-based policy making during the early stages of the epidemic. This study assesses the potential impact of different control measures for mitigating the burden of COVID-19 in the UK.MethodsWe used a stochastic age-structured transmission model to explore a range of intervention scenarios, tracking 66·4 million people aggregated to 186 county-level administrative units in England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. The four base interventions modelled were school closures, physical distancing, shielding of people aged 70 years or older, and self-isolation of symptomatic cases. We also modelled the combination of these interventions, as well as a programme of intensive interventions with phased lockdown-type restrictions that substantially limited contacts outside of the home for repeated periods. We simulated different triggers for the introduction of interventions, and estimated the impact of varying adherence to interventions across counties. For each scenario, we projected estimated new cases over time, patients requiring inpatient and critical care (ie, admission to the intensive care units [ICU]) treatment, and deaths, and compared the effect of each intervention on the basic reproduction number, R0.FindingsWe projected a median unmitigated burden of 23 million (95% prediction interval 13-30) clinical cases and 350 000 deaths (170 000-480 000) due to COVID-19 in the UK by December, 2021. We found that the four base interventions were each likely to decrease R0, but not sufficiently to prevent ICU demand from exceeding health service capacity. The combined intervention was more effective at reducing R0, but only lockdown periods were sufficient to bring R0 near or below 1; the most stringent lockdown scenario resulted in a projected 120 000 cases (46 000-700 000) and 50 000 deaths (9300-160 000). Intensive interventions with lockdown periods would need to be in place for a large proportion of the coming year to prevent health-care demand exceeding availability.InterpretationThe characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 mean that extreme measures are probably required to bring the epidemic under control and to prevent very large numbers of deaths and an excess of demand on hospital beds, especially those in ICUs.FundingMedical Research Council.

Project description:BackgroundIsolation of cases and contact tracing is used to control outbreaks of infectious diseases, and has been used for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Whether this strategy will achieve control depends on characteristics of both the pathogen and the response. Here we use a mathematical model to assess if isolation and contact tracing are able to control onwards transmission from imported cases of COVID-19.MethodsWe developed a stochastic transmission model, parameterised to the COVID-19 outbreak. We used the model to quantify the potential effectiveness of contact tracing and isolation of cases at controlling a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-like pathogen. We considered scenarios that varied in the number of initial cases, the basic reproduction number (R0), the delay from symptom onset to isolation, the probability that contacts were traced, the proportion of transmission that occurred before symptom onset, and the proportion of subclinical infections. We assumed isolation prevented all further transmission in the model. Outbreaks were deemed controlled if transmission ended within 12 weeks or before 5000 cases in total. We measured the success of controlling outbreaks using isolation and contact tracing, and quantified the weekly maximum number of cases traced to measure feasibility of public health effort.FindingsSimulated outbreaks starting with five initial cases, an R0 of 1·5, and 0% transmission before symptom onset could be controlled even with low contact tracing probability; however, the probability of controlling an outbreak decreased with the number of initial cases, when R0 was 2·5 or 3·5 and with more transmission before symptom onset. Across different initial numbers of cases, the majority of scenarios with an R0 of 1·5 were controllable with less than 50% of contacts successfully traced. To control the majority of outbreaks, for R0 of 2·5 more than 70% of contacts had to be traced, and for an R0 of 3·5 more than 90% of contacts had to be traced. The delay between symptom onset and isolation had the largest role in determining whether an outbreak was controllable when R0 was 1·5. For R0 values of 2·5 or 3·5, if there were 40 initial cases, contact tracing and isolation were only potentially feasible when less than 1% of transmission occurred before symptom onset.InterpretationIn most scenarios, highly effective contact tracing and case isolation is enough to control a new outbreak of COVID-19 within 3 months. The probability of control decreases with long delays from symptom onset to isolation, fewer cases ascertained by contact tracing, and increasing transmission before symptoms. This model can be modified to reflect updated transmission characteristics and more specific definitions of outbreak control to assess the potential success of local response efforts.FundingWellcome Trust, Global Challenges Research Fund, and Health Data Research UK.

Dataset Information

The effect of multiple interventions to balance healthcare demand for controlling COVID-19 outbreaks: a modelling study.

Publications

The effect of multiple interventions to balance healthcare demand for controlling COVID-19 outbreaks: a modelling study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets