Associations Between Measures of Social Distancing and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Seropositivity: A Nationwide Population-based Study in the Netherlands.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Clinical trials registration
NTR8473.
SUBMITTER: Vos ERA
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8083720 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Greece imposed a nationwide lockdown in March 2020 to mitigate transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 during the first epidemic wave. We conducted a survey on age-specific social contact patterns to assess effects of physical distancing measures and used a susceptible-exposed-infectious-recovered model to simulate the epidemic. Because multiple distancing measures were implemented simultaneously, we assessed their overall effects and the contribution of each measure. Before measures were implemented, the estimated basic reproduction number (R0) was 2.38 (95% CI 2.01-2.80). During lockdown, daily contacts decreased by 86.9% and R0 decreased by 81.0% (95% credible interval [CrI] 71.8%-86.0%); each distancing measure decreased R0 by 10%-24%. By April 26, the attack rate in Greece was 0.12% (95% CrI 0.06%-0.26%), one of the lowest in Europe, and the infection fatality ratio was 1.12% (95% CrI 0.55%-2.31%). Multiple social distancing measures contained the first epidemic wave in Greece.
| S-EPMC7853557 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Social distancing orders have been enacted worldwide to slow the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, reduce strain on healthcare systems, and prevent deaths. To estimate the impact of the timing and intensity of such measures, we built a mathematical model of COVID-19 transmission that incorporates age-stratified risks and contact patterns and projects numbers of hospitalizations, patients in intensive care units, ventilator needs, and deaths within US cities. Focusing on the Austin metropolitan area of Texas, we found that immediate and extensive social distancing measures were required to ensure that COVID-19 cases did not exceed local hospital capacity by early May 2020. School closures alone hardly changed the epidemic curve. A 2-week delay in implementation was projected to accelerate the timing of peak healthcare needs by 4 weeks and cause a bed shortage in intensive care units. This analysis informed the Stay Home-Work Safe order enacted by Austin on March 24, 2020.
| S-EPMC7510701 | 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:During the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, social distancing was effective in controlling disease spread across South Korea. The impact of national social distancing on the spread of common respiratory virus infections has rarely been investigated. We evaluated the weekly proportion of negative respiratory virus polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test results and weekly positive rates of each respiratory virus during the social distancing period (10th-41st weeks of 2020) and the corresponding period in different years, utilizing the national respiratory virus surveillance dataset reported by the Korean Center for Disease Control and Prevention. The proportions of negative respiratory virus PCR test results increased up to 87.8% and 86.1% during level 3 and level 2 of the social distancing period, respectively. The higher the level of social distancing, the higher the proportion of negative respiratory virus PCR test results. During the social distancing period, the mean weekly positive rates for parainfluenza virus, influenza virus, human coronavirus, and human metapneumovirus were significantly lower than those during the same period in 2015-2019 (0.1% vs. 9.3%, P <0.001; 0.1% vs. 7.2%, P <0.001; 0.4% vs. 2.3%, P <0.001; and 0.2% vs. 5.3%, P <0.001, respectively). The mean positive rate for rhinovirus/enterovirus during level 3 social distancing was lower than that in the same period in 2015-2019 (8.5% vs. 19.0%, P <0.001), but the rate during level 1 social distancing was higher than that in the same period in 2015-2019 (38.3% vs. 19.4%, P <0.001). The national application of social distancing reduced the spread of common respiratory virus infections during the COVID-19 pandemic.
| S-EPMC8202938 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The health risk of the coronavirus pandemic is age-specific. The symptoms of a COVID-19 infection are usually mild in the healthy population below the age of 65; however, the measures laid down to prevent the spread of the virus apply typically to the whole population. Hence, those who have a low risk of severe symptoms face a social dilemma in cooperating and complying with the safety measures: Cooperating in preventing the spread of the disease is good for society but comes with individual costs. These costs provide an incentive not to cooperate with the safety measures. In this paper we analyze via structural equation modelling a sample of young adults (N = 510) who were surveyed right after the end of the first lockdown period in Switzerland. We investigate why and to what extent they cooperated in preventing the epidemic by following the recommendation to stay at home as much as possible. We hypothesize that those respondents who perceive themselves to be personally at risk, or who have relatives belonging to the risk group, complied more often with the safety measures as compared to those without severe risks. Cooperating should also be linked to individuals' pro-social orientation. Furthermore, we hypothesize that those who believe that the virus is dangerous for society or who have a personal interest in protection show higher support for the general safety measures. Our empirical results show that compliance with the coronavirus social distancing measures was generally very high during the first lockdown. Although young adults perceived themselves to be at low personal risk, they still believed that the virus is dangerous for society. Those who had a personal interest in staying at home because they had relatives belonging to the risk group complied more often with the safety measures. Overall, the results suggest that the support of the preventive measures is the most important promoter of cooperation to prevent the spread of COVID-19.
| S-EPMC7894933 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe absence of effective antiviral medications and vaccines increased the focus on non-pharmaceutical preventive behaviors for mitigating against the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. To examine the current status of non-pharmaceutical preventive behaviors practiced during the COVID-19 outbreak and factors affecting behavioral activities, we compared to the 2015 Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) outbreak in Korea.MethodsThis was a serial cross-sectional population-based study in Korea with four surveys conducted on June 2 and 25, 2015 (MERS-CoV surveys), and February 4, and April 2, 2020 (COVID-19 surveys). Of 25,711 participants selected using random digit dialing numbers, 4,011 participants (aged ≥ 18 years) were successfully interviewed, for the 2020 COVID-19 (n = 2,002) and 2015 MERS-CoV (n = 2,009) epidemics were included. Participants were selected post-stratification by sex, age, and province. The total number of weighted cases in this survey equaled the total number of unweighted cases at the national level. We measured the levels of preventive behaviors (social distancing [avoiding physical contact with others]), and practicing transmission-reducing behaviors such as wearing face mask and handwashing.ResultsBetween the surveys, respondents who reported practicing social distancing increased from 41.9%-58.2% (MERS-CoV) to 83.4%-92.3% (COVID-19). The response rate for the four surveys ranged between 13.7% and 17.7%. Practicing transmission-reducing behaviors (wearing face masks and handwashing) at least once during COVID-19 (78.8%, 80.2%) also increased compared to that during MERS-CoV (15.5%, 60.3%). The higher affective risk perception groups were more likely to practice transmission-reducing measures (adjusted odds ratio, 3.24-4.81; 95 confidence interval, 1.76-6.96) during both COVID-19 and MERS-CoV.ConclusionThe study findings suggest markedly increased proportions of non-pharmaceutical behavioral practices evenly across all subgroups during the two different novel virus outbreaks in Korea. Strategic interventions are needed to attempt based on preventive behavior works.
| S-EPMC7295600 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC8239529 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWeeks after issuing social distancing orders to suppress severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission and reduce growth in cases of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), all US states and the District of Columbia partially or fully relaxed these measures.MethodsWe identified all statewide social distancing measures that were implemented and/or relaxed in the United States between 10 March and 15 July 2020, triangulating data from state government and third-party sources. Using segmented linear regression, we estimated the extent to which relaxation of social distancing affected epidemic control, as indicated by the time-varying, state-specific effective reproduction number (Rt).ResultsIn the 8 weeks prior to relaxation, mean Rt declined by 0.012 units per day (95% confidence interval [CI], -.013 to -.012), and 46/51 jurisdictions achieved Rt < 1.0 by the date of relaxation. After relaxation of social distancing, Rt reversed course and began increasing by 0.007 units per day (95% CI, .006-.007), reaching a mean Rt of 1.16. Eight weeks later, the mean Rt was 1.16 and only 9/51 jurisdictions were maintaining an Rt < 1.0. Parallel models showed similar reversals in the growth of COVID-19 cases and deaths. Indicators often used to motivate relaxation at the time of relaxation (eg, test positivity rate <5%) predicted greater postrelaxation epidemic growth.ConclusionsWe detected an immediate and significant reversal in SARS-CoV-2 epidemic suppression after relaxation of social distancing measures across the United States. Premature relaxation of social distancing measures undermined the country's ability to control the disease burden associated with COVID-19.
| S-EPMC7797755 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Since the 2009 influenza pandemic, the Netherlands has used a weekly death monitoring system to estimate deaths in excess of expectations. We present estimates of excess deaths during the ongoing coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic and 10 previous influenza epidemics. Excess deaths per influenza epidemic averaged 4,000. The estimated 9,554 excess deaths (41% in excess) during the COVID-19 epidemic weeks 12-19 of 2020 appeared comparable to the 9,373 excess deaths (18%) during the severe influenza epidemic of 2017-18. However, these deaths occurred in a shorter time, had a higher peak, and were mitigated by nonpharmaceutical control measures. Excess deaths were 1.8-fold higher than reported laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 deaths (5,449). Based on excess deaths and preliminary results from seroepidemiologic studies, we estimated the infection-fatality rate to be 1%. Monitoring of excess deaths is crucial for timely estimates of disease burden for influenza and COVID-19. Our data complement laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 death reports and enable comparisons between epidemics.
| S-EPMC7853586 | biostudies-literature
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