Dataset Information

Impact of winter holiday and government responses on mortality in Europe during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

ABSTRACT:

Background

This aggregated population study investigated the impact of the seemingly quasi-randomly assigned school winter holiday in weeks 6-10 (February to early March) on excess mortality in 219 European regions (11 countries) during the COVID-19 pandemic in the spring 2020. A secondary aim was to evaluate the impact of government responses to the early inflow of infected cases.

Methods

Data on government responses weeks 8-14 were obtained from the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker. Regional data on total all-cause mortality during weeks 14-23 in 2020 were retrieved from Eurostat and national statistical agencies and compared with the average mortality during same period 2015-2019. Variance-weighted least square regression was used with mortality difference as dependent variable with adjustment for country, population density and age distribution.

Results

Being a region with winter holiday exclusively in week 9 was in the adjusted analysis associated with 16 weekly excess deaths [95% confidence interval (CI) 13-20] per million inhabitants during weeks 14-23, which corresponds to 38% of the excess mortality in these regions. A more stringent response implemented in week 11, corresponding to 10 additional units on the 0-100 ordinal scale, was associated with 20 fewer weekly deaths (95% CI 18-22) per million inhabitants.

Conclusions

Winter holiday in week 9 was an amplifying event that contributed importantly to the excess mortality observed in the study regions during the spring 2020. Timely government responses to the resulting early inflow of cases reduced the excess in mortality.

SUBMITTER: Bjork J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7928954 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesThe Covid-19 pandemic changed the humanity life. Millions of deaths and infections that spread rapidly around the world made all countries take measures to stop the outbreaks and assume the enormous consequences that the Coronavirus is leaving behind. The challenge has been enormous; governments across the world have implemented a wide span of nonpharmaceutical interventions to mitigate the Coronavirus pandemic (SARS-CoV-2) and its consequences in economic terms. The aim of this article is to analyze the effects that different kinds of measures taken by Latin American governments had on the daily new infections. The countries analyzed were Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, México, Panamá, Peru, Paraguay, Dominican Republic, Uruguay and Venezuela.MethodsA time series cross-section analysis was performed, which allows studying the evolution of the number of daily cases over time and by country. The timeframe of this study was from the day the first case of coronavirus was registered in a country, until September 14, 2020. We used data from Covid-19 Dashboard database of Johns Hopkins University and the Oxford Covid-19 Government Response Tracker data set.ResultsThe Stringency Index did not have a significant influence at the beginning of the pandemic but turned out to be significant and inversely related to DNI during Phases 2 and 3. On the contrary, the Economic and the Sanitary Containment Index was not statistically significant for any of the phases. Furthermore, the level of wealthfare of a country, measured from its GDP per capita, exerts a substantive conditional influence on the management of the Covid-19 crisis.ConclusionsThe scenarios have been changing and strategies had to change as well in order to be successful because they lose effectiveness and have increased social costs with time. Therefore, understanding the relative effectiveness of such measures had on the disease spreading during the first wave of the outbreak, could help governments to make more informed decisions about how to control future outbreaks of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Project description:BackgroundItaly was the first western country to experience a large Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak and the province of Bergamo experienced one of the deadliest COVID-19 outbreaks in the world. Following the peak of the epidemic in mid-March, the curve has slowly fallen thanks to the strict lockdown imposed by the Italian government on 9th March 2020.MethodsWe performed a cross-sectional study to assess the prevalence of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in 423 workers in Bergamo province who returned to the workplace after the end of the Italian lockdown on 5th May 2020. To this end, we performed an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) to detect the humoral response against SARS-CoV-2 and a nasopharyngeal swab to assess the presence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR). As a secondary aim of the study, we validated a lateral flow immunochromatography assay (LFIA) for the detection of anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.FindingsELISA identified 38.5% positive subjects, of whom 51.5% were positive for both IgG and IgM, 47.3% were positive only for IgG, but only 1.2% were positive for IgM alone. Only 23 (5.4%) participants tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 by rRT-PCR, although with high cycle thresholds (between 34 and 39), indicating a very low residual viral load that was not able to infect cultured cells. All these rRT-PCR positive subjects had already experienced seroconversion. When the ELISA was used as the comparator, the estimated specificity and sensitivity of the rapid LFIA for IgG were 98% and 92%, respectively.Interpretationthe prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the province of Bergamo reached 38.5%, significantly higher than has been reported for most other regions worldwide. Few nasopharyngeal swabs tested positive in fully recovered subjects, though with a very low SARS-CoV-2 viral load, with implications for infectivity and discharge policies for positive individuals in the post-pandemic period. The rapid LFIA used in this study is a valuable tool for rapid serologic surveillance of COVID-19 for population studies.FundingThe study was supported by Regione Lombardia, Milano Serravalle - Milano Tangenziali S.p.A., Brembo S.p.A, and by MEI System.