Dataset Information

Physical distancing implementation, ambient temperature and Covid-19 containment: An observational study in the United States.

ABSTRACT: Governments may relax physical distancing interventions for coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) containment in warm seasons/areas to prevent economic contractions. However, it is not clear whether higher temperature may offset the transmission risk posed by this relaxation. This study aims to investigate the associations of the effective reproductive number (R_t) of Covid-19 with ambient temperature and the implementation of physical distancing interventions in the United States (US). This study included 50 states and one territory of the US with 4,532,650 confirmed cases between 29 January and 31 July 2020. We used an interrupted time-series model with a state-level random intercept for data analysis. An interaction term of 'physical distancing×temperature' was included to examine their interactions. Stratified analyses by temperature and physical distancing implementation were also performed to analyse the modifying effects. The overall median (interquartile range) R_t was 1.2 (1.0-2.3). The implementation of physical distancing was associated with a 12% decrease in the risk of R_t (relative risk [RR]: 0.88, 95% confident interval [CI]: 0.86-0.89), and each 5 °C increase in temperature was associated with a 2% decrease (RR: 0.98, 95%CI: 0.97-0.98). We observed a statistically significant interaction between temperature and physical distancing implementation, but all the RRs were small (close to one). The containing effects of high temperature were attenuated by 5.1% when physical distancing was implemented. The association of COVID-19 R_t with physical distancing implementation was more stable (0.88 vs. 0.89 in days when temperature was low and high, respectively). Increased temperature did not offset the risk of Covid-19 R_t posed by the relaxation of physical distancing implementation. Our study does not recommend relaxing the implementation of physical distancing interventions in warm seasons/areas.

SUBMITTER: Guo C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8139329 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundUnderstanding the differences in timing and composition of physical distancing policies is important to evaluate the early global response to COVID-19. A physical distancing intensity monitoring framework comprising 16 domains was recently published to compare physical distancing approaches across 12 U.S. States. We applied this framework to a diverse set of low and middle-income countries (LMICs) (Botswana, India, Jamaica, Mozambique, Namibia, and Ukraine) to test the appropriateness of this framework in the global context and to compare the policy responses in these LMICs with a sample of U.S. States during the first 100-days of the pandemic.ResultsThe LMICs in our sample adopted wide ranging physical distancing policies. The highest peak daily physical distancing intensity during this period was: Botswana (4.60); India (4.40); Ukraine (4.40); Namibia (4.20); Mozambique (3.87), and Jamaica (3.80). The number of days each country stayed at peak policy intensity ranged from 12-days (Jamaica) to more than 67-days (Mozambique). We found some key similarities and differences, including substantial differences in whether and how countries expressly required certain groups to stay at home. Despite the much higher number of cases in the US, the physical distancing responses in our LMIC sample were generally more intense than in the U.S. States, but results vary depending on the U.S. State. The peak policy intensity for the U.S. 12-state average was 3.84, which would place it lower than every LMIC in this sample except Jamaica. The LMIC sample countries also reached peak physical distancing intensity earlier in outbreak progression compared to the U.S. states sample. The easing of physical distancing policies in the LMIC sample did not discernably correlate with change in COVID-19 incidence.ConclusionsThis physical distancing intensity framework was appropriate for the LMIC context with only minor adaptations. This framework may be useful for ongoing monitoring of physical distancing policy approaches and for use in effectiveness analyses. This analysis helps to highlight the differing paths taken by the countries in this sample and may provide lessons to other countries regarding options for structuring physical distancing policies in response to COVID-19 and future outbreaks.

Project description:BackgroundEffective strategies of prevention have been and can aid in reducing and overcoming contagious diseases including COVID-19, still there is dearth of knowledge regarding general public awareness and perception. The current study aims to determine the existing knowledge and perception of people living in Karachi about isolation, quarantine, social distancing and community containment.MethodsThis cross-sectional online survey was conducted during the months of March and April 2020. The study included men and women of age 18 years and above quarantined during COVID-19. Convenience sampling followed by snowball sampling technique was used. An online structured questionnaire was developed using Google Form. It included questions on socio demographic information, public knowledge and perception about isolation, quarantine, social distancing and community containment. Chi-square test was used for categorical variables and p value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.ResultsA total of 548 participants were involved in this survey, 34% (n = 184) males with a mean age of 28 ± 10 years ranging from 18 to 75 years. The major source of hearing about COVID-19 was social media (72%, n = 393). Overall knowledge scores revealed that 27% (n = 146) participants had excellent knowledge about symptoms and prevention of the COVID-19. Excellent knowledge of quarantining, isolation and community containment and social distancing was 38% among participants. Participants who had good and excellent knowledge were more likely to have positive perception of isolation (p-value < 0.001). Majority participants (89%, n = 487) felt isolation may or may not be against human rights and this perception was found significantly associated with moderate to excellent knowledge about community mitigation measures (p-value = 0.009).ConclusionThis study concludes that optimal public knowledge and perception related to certain aspects of isolation, quarantine, social distancing and community containment exists however knowledge gaps and misperceptions prevail that need to be addressed.

Dataset Information

Physical distancing implementation, ambient temperature and Covid-19 containment: An observational study in the United States.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets