[Evaluation of social distancing measures on the transmissibility of COVID-19 in rural areas. Retrospective logitudinal study of posible cases].
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Aim
To evaluate the social distance effect on the daily frequency of possible SARS-CoV-2 cases in Primary Care, in relation to the predictive model Kermack-McKendrick.Methods
Longitudinal retrospective study in 2 rural populations of Aragon (13,579h). A time series evaluation with a t-Student analysis was carry on, during the first 70 days of the pandemic. A simple Kermack-McKendrick predictive model was compared with the possible COVID-19 cases. Complementary ANOVA analysis to assess the before-after number of daily cases, follow-up days and days from symptoms onset to first contact with Primary Health Care.Results
Three hundred and fifty-nine cases were detected (53.4% women; 70.7% under 60). Primary Care followed 95.3% of cases. The number of cases during the first social distancing strategies was higher in comparison with the model (P=.004, P=.006 and P=.004) with a media of decreases of 6.7 possible cases by series. In relation to the lockdown period the model and cases are close (P=.608 and P=.093), with an average decrease of 1.8 cases per series. During post-containment, the number of cases per day (P<.001) and days of follow-up (P<.001) increased.Conclusions
Social distancing and containment measures were effective in reducing the number of possible COVID-19 cases in rural areas. Primary Care followed most of the cases.
SUBMITTER: Pena-Galo E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7938792 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:ObjectivesIn response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, older adults are advised to follow social distancing measures to prevent infection. However, such measures may increase the risk of loneliness. The current study aimed to investigate (a) whether social distancing measures, particularly limiting close social interactions, are associated with loneliness among older adults, and (b) whether the association between social distancing measures and loneliness is moderated by sociodemographic characteristics.MethodData were from the fourth wave (April 29 to May 26, 2020) of the nationally representative Understanding America Study COVID-19 Survey. We used data on adults 50 years or older (N = 3,253). Logistic regression models of loneliness were performed. Five indicators of social distancing measures were considered: (a) avoiding public spaces, gatherings, or crowds; (b) canceling or postponing social activities; (c) social visits; (d) no close contact (within 6 feet) with people living together; and (e) with people not living together.ResultsCancelling or postponing social activities and avoiding close contact with people living together were associated with 33% (odds ratio [OR] = 1.33, confidence interval [CI] = 1.06-1.68, p < .05) and 47% (OR = 1.47, CI = 1.09-1.99, p < .05) greater odds of loneliness, respectively. Furthermore, limiting close contact with coresidents increased the probability of loneliness more for males, non-Hispanic Whites, and those with higher levels of education and income.DiscussionEfforts should be made to help older adults maintain social connectedness with close others by virtual communication methods. Our findings also call special attention to vulnerable groups at elevated risks of loneliness, emphasizing the need for tailored interventions.
| S-EPMC7928665 | biostudies-literature
Project description:By 21 May 2020, severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) had caused more than 5 million cases of coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) across more than 200 countries. Most countries with significant outbreaks have introduced social distancing or "lockdown" measures to reduce viral transmission. So the key question now is when, how and to what extent these measures can be lifted.Publicly available data on daily numbers of newly confirmed cases and mortality were used to fit regression models estimating trajectories, doubling times and the reproduction number (R0) of the disease, before and under the control measures. These data ran up to 21 May 2020, and were sufficient for analysis in 89 countries.The estimates of R0 before lockdown based on these data were broadly consistent with those previously published: between 2.0 and 3.7 in the countries with the largest number of cases available for analysis (USA, Italy, Spain, France and UK). There was little evidence to suggest that the restrictions had reduced R far below 1 in many places, with France having the most rapid reductions: R0 0.76 (95% CI 0.72-0.82) based on cases, and 0.77 (95% CI 0.73-0.80) based on mortality.Intermittent lockdown has been proposed as a means of controlling the outbreak while allowing periods of increased freedom and economic activity. These data suggest that few countries could have even 1 week per month unrestricted without seeing resurgence of the epidemic. Similarly, restoring 20% of the activity that has been prevented by the lockdowns looks difficult to reconcile with preventing the resurgence of the disease in most countries.
| S-EPMC7263071 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) sickened over 20 million residents in the United States (US) by January 2021. Our objective was to describe state variation in the effect of initial social distancing policies and non-essential business (NEB) closure on infection rates early in 2020.MethodsWe used an interrupted time series study design to estimate the total effect of all state social distancing orders, including NEB closure, shelter-in-place, and stay-at-home orders, on cumulative COVID-19 cases for each state. Data included the daily number of COVID-19 cases and deaths for all 50 states and Washington, DC from the New York Times database (January 21 to May 7, 2020). We predicted cumulative daily cases and deaths using a generalized linear model with a negative binomial distribution and a log link for two models.ResultsSocial distancing was associated with a 15.4% daily reduction (Relative Risk = 0.846; Confidence Interval [CI] = 0.832, 0.859) in COVID-19 cases. After 3 weeks, social distancing prevented nearly 33 million cases nationwide, with about half (16.5 million) of those prevented cases among residents of the Mid-Atlantic census division (New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania). Eleven states prevented more than 10,000 cases per 100,000 residents within 3 weeks.ConclusionsThe effect of social distancing on the infection rate of COVID-19 in the US varied substantially across states, and effects were largest in states with highest community spread.
| S-EPMC8237534 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Influenza virus infections are believed to spread mostly by close contact in the community. Social distancing measures are essential components of the public health response to influenza pandemics. The objective of these mitigation measures is to reduce transmission, thereby delaying the epidemic peak, reducing the size of the epidemic peak, and spreading cases over a longer time to relieve pressure on the healthcare system. We conducted systematic reviews of the evidence base for effectiveness of multiple mitigation measures: isolating ill persons, contact tracing, quarantining exposed persons, school closures, workplace measures/closures, and avoiding crowding. Evidence supporting the effectiveness of these measures was obtained largely from observational studies and simulation studies. Voluntary isolation at home might be a more feasible social distancing measure, and pandemic plans should consider how to facilitate this measure. More drastic social distancing measures might be reserved for severe pandemics.
| S-EPMC7181908 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In the absence of pharmaceutical interventions, social distancing is being used worldwide to curb the spread of COVID-19. The impact of these measures has been inconsistent, with some regions rapidly nearing disease elimination and others seeing delayed peaks or nearly flat epidemic curves. Here we build a stochastic epidemic model to examine the effects of COVID-19 clinical progression and transmission network structure on the outcomes of social distancing interventions. Our simulations show that long delays between the adoption of control measures and observed declines in cases, hospitalizations, and deaths occur in many scenarios. We find that the strength of within-household transmission is a critical determinant of success, governing the timing and size of the epidemic peak, the rate of decline, individual risks of infection, and the success of partial relaxation measures. The structure of residual external connections, driven by workforce participation and essential businesses, interacts to determine outcomes. We suggest limited conditions under which the formation of household "bubbles" can be safe. These findings can improve future predictions of the timescale and efficacy of interventions needed to control second waves of COVID-19 as well as other similar outbreaks, and highlight the need for better quantification and control of household transmission.
| S-EPMC7886148 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In the absence of pharmaceutical interventions, social distancing is being used worldwide to curb the spread of COVID-19. The impact of these measures has been inconsistent, with some regions rapidly nearing disease elimination and others seeing delayed peaks or nearly flat epidemic curves. Here we build a stochastic epidemic model to examine the effects of COVID-19 clinical progression and transmission network structure on the outcomes of social distancing interventions. Our simulations show that long delays between the adoption of control measures and observed declines in cases, hospitalizations, and deaths occur in many scenarios. We find that the strength of within-household transmission is a critical determinant of success, governing the timing and size of the epidemic peak, the rate of decline, individual risks of infection, and the success of partial relaxation measures. The structure of residual external connections, driven by workforce participation and essential businesses, interacts to determine outcomes. We suggest limited conditions under which the formation of household "bubbles" can be safe. These findings can improve future predictions of the timescale and efficacy of interventions needed to control second waves of COVID-19 as well as other similar outbreaks, and highlight the need for better quantification and control of household transmission.
| S-EPMC7302300 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportancePolicies to promote social distancing can minimize COVID-19 transmission but come with substantial social and economic costs. Quantifying relative preferences among the public for such practices can inform locally relevant policy prioritization and optimize uptake.ObjectiveTo evaluate relative utilities (ie, preferences) for COVID-19 pandemic social distancing strategies against the hypothetical risk of acquiring COVID-19 and anticipated income loss.Design, setting, and participantsThis survey study recruited individuals living in the Missouri area from May to June 2020 via randomly distributed unincentivized social media advertisements and local recruitment platforms for members of minority racial and ethnic groups. Participants answered 6 questions that asked them to choose between 2 hypothetical counties where business closures, social distancing policy duration, COVID-19 infection risk, and income loss varied.Main outcomes and measuresReweighted population-level relative preferences (utilities) for social distancing policies, subgroups, and latent classes.ResultsThe survey had a 3% response rate (3045 of 90 320). Of the 2428 respondents who completed the survey, 1669 (75%) were 35 years and older, 1536 (69%) were women, and 1973 (89%) were White. After reweighting to match Missouri population demographic characteristics, the strongest preference was for the prohibition of large gatherings (mean preference, -1.43; 95% CI, -1.67 to -1.18), with relative indifference to the closure of social and lifestyle venues (mean preference, 0.05; 95% CI, -0.08 to 0.17). There were weak preferences to keep outdoor venues (mean preference, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.61) and schools (mean preference, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.30) open. Latent class analysis revealed 4 distinct preference phenotypes in the population: risk averse (48.9%), conflicted (22.5%), prosocial (14.9%), and back to normal (13.7%), with men twice as likely as women to belong to the back to normal group than the risk averse group (relative risk ratio, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.54 to 3.12).Conclusions and relevanceIn this survey study using a discrete choice experiment, public health policies that prohibited large gatherings, as well as those that closed social and lifestyle venues, appeared to be acceptable to the public. During policy implementation, these activities should be prioritized for first-phase closures. These findings suggest that policy messages that address preference heterogeneity (eg, focusing on specific preference subgroups or targeting men) could improve adherence to social distancing measures for COVID-19 and future pandemics.
| S-EPMC8267603 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Social distancing measures implemented by governments worldwide during the COVID-19 pandemic have proven an effective intervention to control the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. There is a growing literature on predictors of adherence behaviours to social distancing measures, however, there are no comprehensive insights into the nature and types of non-adherence behaviours. To address this gap in the literature, we studied non-adherence in terms of counts of infringements and people's accounts on their behaviours in a sample of North London residents. We focused on the following social distancing rules: keeping 2 mts. distancing, meeting family and friends, and going out for non-essential reasons. A mixed-methods explanatory sequential design was used comprising an online survey (May 1-31, 2020) followed by semi-structured in-depth interviews held with a purposive sample of survey respondents (August 5 -September 21, 2020). A negative binomial regression model (quantitative) and Framework Analysis (qualitative) were undertaken.681 individuals completed the survey, and 30 individuals were interviewed. We integrated survey and interview findings following three levels of the Social Ecological model: individual, interpersonal and community levels. We identified non-adherence behaviours as unintentional (barriers beyond individual's control) and intentional (deliberate decision). Unintentional adherence was reported by interviewees as, lack of controllability in keeping 2 mts. distancing, environmental constraints, social responsibility towards the community and feeling low risk. Intentional non-adherence was statistically associated with and reported as lack of trust in Government, support from friends, and lack of knowledge about rules. In addition, interviewees reported individual risk assessment and decision making on the extent to following the rules, and perceived lack of adherence in the local area. Our findings indicate that unintentional and intentional non-adherence should be improved by Government partnerships with local communities to build trust in social distancing measures; tailored messaging to young adults emphasising the need of protecting others whilst clarifying the risk of transmission; and ensuring COVID-secured environments by working with environmental health officers.
| S-EPMC8376044 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This article describes patterns of compliance with social distancing measures among the Spanish population during the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. It identifies several factors associated with higher or lower compliance with recommended measures of social distancing. This research is part of a 67-country study, titled the International COVID-19 study on Social & Moral Psychology, in which we use a Spanish dataset. Participants were residents in Spain aged 18 or above. The sample comprises 1,090 respondents, weighted to be representative of the Spanish population. Frequencies, correlations, bivariate analysis, and six models based on hierarchical multiple regressions were applied. The main finding is that most Spaniards are compliant with established guidelines of social distance during the pandemic (State of Alarm, before May 2020). Variables associated more with lower levels of compliance with these standards were explored. Six hierarchical multiple regression models found that compliance with social distance measures has a multifactorial explanation (R 2 between 20.4 and 49.1%). Sociodemographic factors, personal hygiene patterns, and the interaction between personal hygiene patterns and the support for political measures related to the coronavirus brought significant effects on the regression models. Less compliance was also associated with beliefs in some specific conspiracy theories with regard to COVID-19 or general conspiracy mentality (Conspiracy Mentality Questionnaire, CMQ), consumption patterns of traditional mass media (television, paper newspapers, magazines, and radio) and modern means to get informed (online digital newspapers, blogs, and social networks), political ideology, vote, trust in institutions, and political identification. Among the future lines of action in preventing the possible outbreak of the virus, we suggest measures to reinforce trust in official information, mainly linked to reducing the influence of disinformation and conspiracy theories parallel to the pandemic.
| S-EPMC8476756 | biostudies-literature
Project description:With the severity of the COVID-19 outbreak, we characterize the nature of the growth trajectories of counties in the United States using a novel combination of spectral clustering and the correlation matrix. As the U.S. and the rest of the world are experiencing a severe second wave of infections, the importance of assigning growth membership to counties and understanding the determinants of the growth are increasingly evident. Subsequently, we select the demographic features that are most statistically significant in distinguishing the communities. Lastly, we effectively predict the future growth of a given county with an LSTM using three social distancing scores. This comprehensive study captures the nature of counties' growth in cases at a very micro-level using growth communities, demographic factors, and social distancing performance to help government agencies utilize known information to make appropriate decisions regarding which potential counties to target resources and funding to.
| S-EPMC7805455 | biostudies-literature