Quantifying the Impact of Lifting Community Nonpharmaceutical Interventions for COVID-19 During Vaccination Rollout in the United States.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Matrajt L
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8294674 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:We evaluate the impacts of implementing and lifting nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) in US counties on the daily growth rate of COVID-19 cases and compliance, measured through the percentage of devices staying home, and evaluate whether introducing and lifting NPIs protecting selective populations is an effective strategy. We use difference-in-differences methods, leveraging on daily county-level data and exploit the staggered introduction and lifting of policies across counties over time. We also assess heterogenous impacts due to counties' population characteristics, namely ethnicity and household income. Results show that introducing NPIs led to a reduction in cases through the percentage of devices staying home. When counties lifted NPIs, they benefited from reduced mobility outside of the home during the lockdown, but only for a short period. In the long term, counties experienced diminished health and mobility gains accrued from previously implemented policies. Notably, we find heterogenous impacts due to population characteristics implying that measures can mitigate the disproportionate burden of COVID-19 on marginalized populations and find that selectively targeting populations may not be effective.
| S-EPMC8000285 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Summary This paper estimates the effect of nonpharmaceutical intervention policies on public health during the COVID-19 outbreak by considering a counterfactual case for Sweden. Using a synthetic control approach, I find that strict initial lockdown measures play an important role in limiting the spread of the COVID-19 infection, as the infection cases in Sweden would have been reduced by almost 75 percent had its policymakers followed stricter containment policies. As people dynamically adjust their behaviour in response to information and policies, the impact of nonpharmaceutical interventions becomes visible, with a time lag of around 5 weeks. Supplementary robustness checks and an alternative difference-in-differences framework analysis do not fundamentally alter the main conclusions. Finally, extending the analysis to excess mortality, I find that the lockdown measures would have been associated with a lower excess mortality rate in Sweden by 25 percentage points, with a steep age gradient of 29 percentage points for the most vulnerable elderly cohort. The outcome of this study can assist policymakers in laying out future guidelines to further protect public health, as well as facilitate plans for economic recovery.
| S-EPMC7499505 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Since the outbreak of COVID-19, vaccination against the virus has been implemented and has progressed among various groups across all ethnicities, genders, and almost all ages in the United States. This study examines the impacts of socioeconomic status and political preference on COVID-19 vaccination in over 443 counties in the southwestern United States. Regression analysis was used to examine the association between a county’s vaccination rate and one’s personal income, employment status, education, race and ethnicity, age, occupation, residential area, and political preference. The results were as follows: First, counties with higher average personal income tend to have a higher vaccination rate (p < 0.001). Second, county-level vaccination is significantly associated with the percentage of Democrat votes (β = 0.242, p < 0.001). Third, race and ethnicity are vaccine-influencing factors. Counties with more Black residents have lower vaccine acceptance (β = −0.419, p < 0.001), while those where more Hispanics or Native Americans reside are more likely to accept vaccines for health protection (β = 0.202, p < 0.001; β = 0.057, p = 0.008, respectively). Lastly, pertaining to the age difference, seniors aged 65 and older show substantial support for vaccination, followed by the median age group (all p < 0.001).
| S-EPMC9680412 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSince December 2020, public health agencies have implemented a variety of vaccination strategies to curb the spread of SARS-CoV-2, along with pre-existing Nonpharmaceutical Interventions (NPIs). Initial strategies focused on vaccinating the elderly to prevent hospitalizations and deaths, but with vaccines becoming available to the broader population, it became important to determine the optimal strategy to enable the safe lifting of NPIs while avoiding virus resurgence.MethodsWe extended the classic deterministic SIR compartmental disease-transmission model to simulate the lifting of NPIs under different vaccine rollout scenarios. Using case and vaccination data from Toronto, Canada between December 28, 2020, and May 19, 2021, we estimated transmission throughout past stages of NPI escalation/relaxation to compare the impact of lifting NPIs on different dates on cases, hospitalizations, and deaths, given varying degrees of vaccine coverages by 20-year age groups, accounting for waning immunity.ResultsWe found that, once coverage among the elderly is high enough (80% with at least one dose), the main age groups to target are 20-39 and 40-59 years, wherein first-dose coverage of at least 70% by mid-June 2021 is needed to minimize the possibility of resurgence if NPIs are to be lifted in the summer. While a resurgence was observed for every scenario of NPI lifting, we also found that under an optimistic vaccination coverage (70% coverage by mid-June, along with postponing reopening from August 2021 to September 2021) can reduce case counts and severe outcomes by roughly 57% by December 31, 2021.ConclusionsOur results suggest that focusing the vaccination strategy on the working-age population can curb the spread of SARS-CoV-2. However, even with high vaccination coverage in adults, increasing contacts and easing protective personal behaviours is not advisable since a resurgence is expected to occur, especially with an earlier reopening.
| S-EPMC9283818 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceVaccination against SARS-CoV-2 has the potential to significantly reduce transmission and COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. The relative importance of vaccination strategies and nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) is not well understood.ObjectiveTo assess the association of simulated COVID-19 vaccine efficacy and coverage scenarios with and without NPIs with infections, hospitalizations, and deaths.Design, setting, and participantsAn established agent-based decision analytical model was used to simulate COVID-19 transmission and progression from March 24, 2020, to September 23, 2021. The model simulated COVID-19 spread in North Carolina, a US state of 10.5 million people. A network of 1 017 720 agents was constructed from US Census data to represent the statewide population.ExposuresScenarios of vaccine efficacy (50% and 90%), vaccine coverage (25%, 50%, and 75% at the end of a 6-month distribution period), and NPIs (reduced mobility, school closings, and use of face masks) maintained and removed during vaccine distribution.Main outcomes and measuresRisks of infection from the start of vaccine distribution and risk differences comparing scenarios. Outcome means and SDs were calculated across replications.ResultsIn the worst-case vaccination scenario (50% efficacy, 25% coverage), a mean (SD) of 2 231 134 (117 867) new infections occurred after vaccination began with NPIs removed, and a mean (SD) of 799 949 (60 279) new infections occurred with NPIs maintained during 11 months. In contrast, in the best-case scenario (90% efficacy, 75% coverage), a mean (SD) of 527 409 (40 637) new infections occurred with NPIs removed and a mean (SD) of 450 575 (32 716) new infections occurred with NPIs maintained. With NPIs removed, lower efficacy (50%) and higher coverage (75%) reduced infection risk by a greater magnitude than higher efficacy (90%) and lower coverage (25%) compared with the worst-case scenario (mean [SD] absolute risk reduction, 13% [1%] and 8% [1%], respectively).Conclusions and relevanceSimulation outcomes suggest that removing NPIs while vaccines are distributed may result in substantial increases in infections, hospitalizations, and deaths. Furthermore, as NPIs are removed, higher vaccination coverage with less efficacious vaccines can contribute to a larger reduction in risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with more efficacious vaccines at lower coverage. These findings highlight the need for well-resourced and coordinated efforts to achieve high vaccine coverage and continued adherence to NPIs before many prepandemic activities can be resumed.
| S-EPMC8170542 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Global vaccine development efforts have been accelerated in response to the devastating COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the impact of a 2-dose COVID-19 vaccination campaign on reducing incidence, hospitalizations, and deaths in the United States (US). We developed an agent-based model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission and parameterized it with US demographics and age-specific COVID-19 outcomes. Healthcare workers and high-risk individuals were prioritized for vaccination, while children under 18 years of age were not vaccinated. We considered a vaccine efficacy of 95% against disease following 2 doses administered 21 days apart achieving 40% vaccine coverage of the overall population within 284 days. We varied vaccine efficacy against infection, and specified 10% pre-existing population immunity for the base-case scenario. The model was calibrated to an effective reproduction number of 1.2, accounting for current non-pharmaceutical interventions in the US. Vaccination reduced the overall attack rate to 4.6% (95% CrI: 4.3% - 5.0%) from 9.0% (95% CrI: 8.4% - 9.4%) without vaccination, over 300 days. The highest relative reduction (54-62%) was observed among individuals aged 65 and older. Vaccination markedly reduced adverse outcomes, with non-ICU hospitalizations, ICU hospitalizations, and deaths decreasing by 63.5% (95% CrI: 60.3% - 66.7%), 65.6% (95% CrI: 62.2% - 68.6%), and 69.3% (95% CrI: 65.5% - 73.1%), respectively, across the same period. Our results indicate that vaccination can have a substantial impact on mitigating COVID-19 outbreaks, even with limited protection against infection. However, continued compliance with non-pharmaceutical interventions is essential to achieve this impact.
| S-EPMC7709178 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Every year in the United States more than 12,000 women are diagnosed with cervical cancer, a disease principally caused by human papillomavirus (HPV). Bivalent and quadrivalent HPV vaccines protect against 66% of HPV-associated cervical cancers, and a new nonavalent vaccine protects against an additional 15% of cervical cancers. However, vaccination policy varies across states, and migration between states interdependently dilutes state-specific vaccination policies. To quantify the economic and epidemiological impacts of switching to the nonavalent vaccine both for individual states and for the nation as a whole, we developed a model of HPV transmission and cervical cancer incidence that incorporates state-specific demographic dynamics, sexual behavior, and migratory patterns. At the national level, the nonavalent vaccine was shown to be cost-effective compared with the bivalent and quadrivalent vaccines at any coverage despite the greater per-dose cost of the new vaccine. Furthermore, the nonavalent vaccine remains cost-effective with up to an additional 40% coverage of the adolescent population, representing 80% of girls and 62% of boys. We find that expansion of coverage would have the greatest health impact in states with the lowest coverage because of the decreasing marginal returns of herd immunity. Our results show that if policies promoting nonavalent vaccine implementation and expansion of coverage are coordinated across multiple states, all states benefit both in health and in economic terms.
| S-EPMC4983834 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate the health and economic impact of the varicella vaccination program on varicella disease in the United States (US), 1996-2020.MethodsAnalysis was conducted using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or published annual population-based varicella incidence, and varicella-associated hospitalization, outpatient visit, and mortality rates in the US population aged 0-49 years during 1996-2020 (range, 199.5-214.2 million persons) compared to before vaccination (1990-1994). Disease costs were estimated using the societal perspective. Vaccination program costs included costs of vaccine, administration, postvaccination adverse events, and travel and work time lost to obtain vaccination. All costs were adjusted to 2020 US dollars using a 3% annual discount rate. The main outcome measures were the number of varicella-associated cases, hospitalizations, hospitalization days, and premature deaths prevented; life-years saved; and net societal savings from the US varicella vaccination program.ResultsAmong US persons aged 0-49 years, during 1996-2020, it is estimated that more than 91 million varicella cases, 238 000 hospitalizations, 1.1 million hospitalization days, and almost 2000 deaths were prevented and 118 000 life-years were saved by the varicella vaccination program, at net societal savings of $23.4 billion.ConclusionsVaricella vaccination has resulted in substantial disease prevention and societal savings for the US over 25 years of program implementation.
| S-EPMC10941259 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Polypharmacy is increasingly common in the United States, and contributes to the substantial burden of drug-related morbidity. Yet real-world polypharmacy patterns remain poorly characterized. We have counted the incidence of multi-drug combinations observed in four billion patient-months of outpatient prescription drug claims from 2007-2014 in the Truven Health MarketScan® Databases. Prescriptions are grouped into discrete windows of concomitant drug exposure, which are used to count exposure incidences for combinations of up to five drug ingredients or ATC drug classes. Among patients taking any prescription drug, half are exposed to two or more drugs, and 5% are exposed to 8 or more. The most common multi-drug combinations treat manifestations of metabolic syndrome. Patients are exposed to unique drug combinations in 10% of all exposure windows. Our analysis of multi-drug exposure incidences provides a detailed summary of polypharmacy in a large US cohort, which can prioritize common drug combinations for future safety and efficacy studies.
| S-EPMC5663207 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe Community Preventive Services Task Force (CPSTF) has recommended several interventions that have been demonstrated to be effective at increasing vaccination coverage.ObjectiveConduct a systematic review to examine the costs of interventions designed to increase vaccination coverage among children and adolescents in the United States.Data sourcesPubMed, EconLit, Embase, and Cochrane.Study eligibility, participants, and interventionsPeer-reviewed articles from January 1, 2009 to August 31, 2019.Appraisal and synthesis methodsStudies were identified with systematic searches of the literature, reviewed for inclusion criteria, abstracted for data on intervention, target population, costs, and risk of bias. Cost measures were reported as costs per child in the target population, costs per vaccinated child, incremental costs per vaccinated child, and costs per vaccine dose administered. Results were stratified by intervention type, vaccine, and age group.ResultsThirty-seven studies were identified for full-text review. Across all interventions and age groups, the cost per child ranged from $0.10 to $537.38, and the incremental cost per vaccinated child ranged from $6.52 to $5,098.57. Provider assessment and feedback interventions had the lowest (median) cost per child ($0.17) and a healthcare system-based combined intervention with multiple components had the lowest (median) incremental cost per vaccinated child ($26.65). A community-based combined intervention with multiple components had the highest median cost per child ($537.38) and the highest median incremental cost per vaccinated child ($5,098.57).LimitationsA small number of included intervention types and inconsistent cost definition.ConclusionsThere is substantial variability in the costs of CPSTF-recommended interventions.
| S-EPMC9998236 | biostudies-literature