Dataset Information

Outbreaks of COVID-19 variants in US prisons: a mathematical modelling analysis of vaccination and reopening policies.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Residents of prisons have experienced disproportionate COVID-19-related health harms. To control outbreaks, many prisons in the USA restricted in-person activities, which are now resuming even as viral variants proliferate. This study aims to use mathematical modelling to assess the risks and harms of COVID-19 outbreaks in prisons under a range of policies, including resumption of activities.

Methods

We obtained daily resident-level data for all California state prisons from Jan 1, 2020, to May 15, 2021, describing prison layouts, housing status, sociodemographic and health characteristics, participation in activities, and COVID-19 testing, infection, and vaccination status. We developed a transmission-dynamic stochastic microsimulation parameterised by the California data and published literature. After an initial infection is introduced to a prison, the model evaluates the effect of various policy scenarios on infections and hospitalisations over 200 days. Scenarios vary by vaccine coverage, baseline immunity (0%, 25%, or 50%), resumption of activities, and use of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) that reduce transmission by 75%. We simulated five prison types that differ by residential layout and demographics, and estimated outcomes with and without repeated infection introductions over the 200 days.

Findings

If a viral variant is introduced into a prison that has resumed pre-2020 contact levels, has moderate vaccine coverage (ranging from 36% to 76% among residents, dependent on age, with 40% coverage for staff), and has no baseline immunity, 23-74% of residents are expected to be infected over 200 days. High vaccination coverage (90%) coupled with NPIs reduces cumulative infections to 2-54%. Even in prisons with low room occupancies (ie, no more than two occupants) and low levels of cumulative infections (ie, <10%), hospitalisation risks are substantial when these prisons house medically vulnerable populations. Risks of large outbreaks (>20% of residents infected) are substantially higher if infections are repeatedly introduced.

Interpretation

Balancing benefits of resuming activities against risks of outbreaks presents challenging trade-offs. After achieving high vaccine coverage, prisons with mostly one-to-two-person cells that have higher baseline immunity from previous outbreaks can resume in-person activities with low risk of a widespread new outbreak, provided they maintain widespread NPIs, continue testing, and take measures to protect the medically vulnerable.

Funding

Horowitz Family Foundation, National Institute on Drug Abuse, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Science Foundation, Open Society Foundation, Advanced Micro Devices.

SUBMITTER: Ryckman T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8342313 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo investigate the impact of targeted vaccination strategies on morbidity and mortality due to COVID-19, as well as on the incidence of SARS-CoV-2, in India.DesignMathematical modelling.SettingsIndian epidemic of COVID-19 and vulnerable population.Data sourcesCountry-specific and age-segregated pattern of social contact, case fatality rate and demographic data obtained from peer-reviewed literature and public domain.ModelAn age-structured dynamical model describing SARS-CoV-2 transmission in India incorporating uncertainty in natural history parameters was constructed.InterventionsComparison of different vaccine strategies by targeting priority groups such as keyworkers including healthcare professionals, individuals with comorbidities (24-60 years old) and all above 60.Main outcome measuresIncidence reduction and averted deaths in different scenarios, assuming that the current restrictions are fully lifted as vaccination is implemented.ResultsThe priority groups together account for about 18% of India's population. An infection-preventing vaccine with 60% efficacy covering all these groups would reduce peak symptomatic incidence by 20.6% (95% uncertainty intervals (UI) 16.7-25.4) and cumulative mortality by 29.7% (95% CrI 25.8-33.8). A similar vaccine with ability to prevent symptoms (but not infection) will reduce peak incidence of symptomatic cases by 10.4% (95% CrI 8.4-13.0) and cumulative mortality by 32.9% (95% CrI 28.6-37.3). In the event of insufficient vaccine supply to cover all priority groups, model projections suggest that after keyworkers, vaccine strategy should prioritise all who are >60 and subsequently individuals with comorbidities. In settings with weakest transmission, such as sparsely populated rural areas, those with comorbidities should be prioritised after keyworkers.ConclusionsAn appropriately targeted vaccination strategy would witness substantial mitigation of impact of COVID-19 in a country like India with wide heterogeneity. 'Smart vaccination', based on public health considerations, rather than mass vaccination, appears prudent.

Project description:BackgroundThe dynamics of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 are complicated by age-dependent factors, changing levels of infection, and the relaxation of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) as the perceived risk declines, necessitating the use of mathematical models. Our aims were to use epidemiological data from the UK together with estimates of vaccine efficacy to predict the possible long-term dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 under the planned vaccine rollout.MethodsIn this study, we used a mathematical model structured by age and UK region, fitted to a range of epidemiological data in the UK, which incorporated the planned rollout of a two-dose vaccination programme (doses 12 weeks apart, protection onset 14 days after vaccination). We assumed default vaccine uptake of 95% in those aged 80 years and older, 85% in those aged 50-79 years, and 75% in those aged 18-49 years, and then varied uptake optimistically and pessimistically. Vaccine efficacy against symptomatic disease was assumed to be 88% on the basis of Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines being administered in the UK, and protection against infection was varied from 0% to 85%. We considered the combined interaction of the UK vaccination programme with multiple potential future relaxations (or removals) of NPIs, to predict the reproduction number (R) and pattern of daily deaths and hospital admissions due to COVID-19 from January, 2021, to January, 2024.FindingsWe estimate that vaccination alone is insufficient to contain the outbreak. In the absence of NPIs, even with our most optimistic assumption that the vaccine will prevent 85% of infections, we estimate R to be 1·58 (95% credible intervals [CI] 1·36-1·84) once all eligible adults have been offered both doses of the vaccine. Under the default uptake scenario, removal of all NPIs once the vaccination programme is complete is predicted to lead to 21 400 deaths (95% CI 1400-55 100) due to COVID-19 for a vaccine that prevents 85% of infections, although this number increases to 96 700 deaths (51 800-173 200) if the vaccine only prevents 60% of infections. Although vaccination substantially reduces total deaths, it only provides partial protection for the individual; we estimate that, for the default uptake scenario and 60% protection against infection, 48·3% (95% CI 48·1-48·5) and 16·0% (15·7-16·3) of deaths will be in individuals who have received one or two doses of the vaccine, respectively.InterpretationFor all vaccination scenarios we investigated, our predictions highlight the risks associated with early or rapid relaxation of NPIs. Although novel vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 offer a potential exit strategy for the pandemic, success is highly contingent on the precise vaccine properties and population uptake, both of which need to be carefully monitored.FundingNational Institute for Health Research, Medical Research Council, and UK Research and Innovation.

Project description:BackgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, authorities must decide which groups to prioritise for vaccination in a shifting social-epidemiological landscape in which the success of large-scale non-pharmaceutical interventions requires broad social acceptance. We aimed to compare projected COVID-19 mortality under four different strategies for the prioritisation of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines.MethodsWe developed a coupled social-epidemiological model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in which social and epidemiological dynamics interact with one another. We modelled how population adherence to non-pharmaceutical interventions responds to case incidence. In the model, schools and workplaces are also closed and reopened on the basis of reported cases. The model was parameterised with data on COVID-19 cases and mortality, SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence, population mobility, and demography from Ontario, Canada (population 14·5 million). Disease progression parameters came from the SARS-CoV-2 epidemiological literature. We assumed a vaccine with 75% efficacy against disease and transmissibility. We compared vaccinating those aged 60 years and older first (oldest-first strategy), vaccinating those younger than 20 years first (youngest-first strategy), vaccinating uniformly by age (uniform strategy), and a novel contact-based strategy. The latter three strategies interrupt transmission, whereas the first targets a vulnerable group to reduce disease. Vaccination rates ranged from 0·5% to 5% of the population per week, beginning on either Jan 1 or Sept 1, 2021.FindingsCase notifications, non-pharmaceutical intervention adherence, and lockdown undergo successive waves that interact with the timing of the vaccine programme to determine the relative effectiveness of the four strategies. Transmission-interrupting strategies become relatively more effective with time as herd immunity builds. The model predicts that, in the absence of vaccination, 72 000 deaths (95% credible interval 40 000-122 000) would occur in Ontario from Jan 1, 2021, to March 14, 2025, and at a vaccination rate of 1·5% of the population per week, the oldest-first strategy would reduce COVID-19 mortality by 90·8% on average (followed by 89·5% in the uniform, 88·9% in the contact-based, and 88·2% in the youngest-first strategies). 60 000 deaths (31 000-108 000) would occur from Sept 1, 2021, to March 14, 2025, in the absence of vaccination, and the contact-based strategy would reduce COVID-19 mortality by 92·6% on average (followed by 92·1% in the uniform, 91·0% in the oldest-first, and 88·3% in the youngest-first strategies) at a vaccination rate of 1·5% of the population per week.InterpretationThe most effective vaccination strategy for reducing mortality due to COVID-19 depends on the time course of the pandemic in the population. For later vaccination start dates, use of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines to interrupt transmission might prevent more deaths than prioritising vulnerable age groups.FundingOntario Ministry of Colleges and Universities.

Project description:BackgroundThe first COVID-19 vaccine outside a clinical trial setting was administered on Dec 8, 2020. To ensure global vaccine equity, vaccine targets were set by the COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access (COVAX) Facility and WHO. However, due to vaccine shortfalls, these targets were not achieved by the end of 2021. We aimed to quantify the global impact of the first year of COVID-19 vaccination programmes.MethodsA mathematical model of COVID-19 transmission and vaccination was separately fit to reported COVID-19 mortality and all-cause excess mortality in 185 countries and territories. The impact of COVID-19 vaccination programmes was determined by estimating the additional lives lost if no vaccines had been distributed. We also estimated the additional deaths that would have been averted had the vaccination coverage targets of 20% set by COVAX and 40% set by WHO been achieved by the end of 2021.FindingsBased on official reported COVID-19 deaths, we estimated that vaccinations prevented 14·4 million (95% credible interval [Crl] 13·7-15·9) deaths from COVID-19 in 185 countries and territories between Dec 8, 2020, and Dec 8, 2021. This estimate rose to 19·8 million (95% Crl 19·1-20·4) deaths from COVID-19 averted when we used excess deaths as an estimate of the true extent of the pandemic, representing a global reduction of 63% in total deaths (19·8 million of 31·4 million) during the first year of COVID-19 vaccination. In COVAX Advance Market Commitment countries, we estimated that 41% of excess mortality (7·4 million [95% Crl 6·8-7·7] of 17·9 million deaths) was averted. In low-income countries, we estimated that an additional 45% (95% CrI 42-49) of deaths could have been averted had the 20% vaccination coverage target set by COVAX been met by each country, and that an additional 111% (105-118) of deaths could have been averted had the 40% target set by WHO been met by each country by the end of 2021.InterpretationCOVID-19 vaccination has substantially altered the course of the pandemic, saving tens of millions of lives globally. However, inadequate access to vaccines in low-income countries has limited the impact in these settings, reinforcing the need for global vaccine equity and coverage.FundingSchmidt Science Fellowship in partnership with the Rhodes Trust; WHO; UK Medical Research Council; Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance; Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; National Institute for Health Research; and Community Jameel.

Project description:ImportancePrisons and jails are high-risk environments for COVID-19. Vaccination levels among workers in many such settings remain markedly lower than those of residents and members of surrounding communities. The situation is troubling because prison staff are a key vector for COVID-19 transmission.ObjectiveTo assess patterns and timing of staff vaccination in California state prisons and identify individual-level and community-level factors associated with remaining unvaccinated.Design setting and participantsThis cohort study used data from December 22, 2020, through June 30, 2021, to quantify the fractions of staff and incarcerated residents who remained unvaccinated among 23 472 custody and 7617 health care staff who worked in roles requiring direct contact with residents at 33 of the 35 prisons operated by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. Multivariable probit regressions assessed demographic, community, and peer factors associated with staff vaccination uptake.Main outcomes and measuresRemaining unvaccinated throughout the study period.ResultsOf 23 472 custody staff, 3751 (16%) were women, and 1454 (6%) were Asian/Pacific Islander individuals, 1571 (7%) Black individuals, 9008 (38%) Hispanic individuals, and 6666 (28%) White individuals. Of 7617 health care staff, 5434 (71%) were women, and 2148 (28%) were Asian/Pacific Islander individuals, 1201 (16%) Black individuals, 1409 (18%) Hispanic individuals, and 1771 (23%) White individuals. A total of 6103 custody staff (26%) and 3961 health care staff (52%) received 1 or more doses of a COVID-19 vaccine during the first 2 months vaccines were offered, but vaccination rates stagnated thereafter. By June 30, 2021, 14 317 custody staff (61%) and 2819 health care staff (37%) remained unvaccinated. In adjusted analyses, remaining unvaccinated was positively associated with younger age (custody staff: age, 18-29 years vs ≥60 years, 75% [95% CI, 73%-76%] vs 45% [95% CI, 42%-48%]; health care staff: 52% [95% CI, 48%-56%] vs 29% [95% CI, 27%-32%]), prior COVID-19 infection (custody staff: 67% [95% CI, 66%-68%] vs 59% [95% CI, 59%-60%]; health care staff: 44% [95% CI, 42%-47%] vs 36% [95% CI, 36%-36%]), residing in a community with relatively low rates of vaccination (custody staff: 75th vs 25th percentile:, 63% [95% CI, 62%-63%] vs 60% [95% CI, 59%-60%]; health care staff: 40% [95% CI, 39%-41%] vs 34% [95% CI, 33%-35%]), and sharing shifts with coworkers who had relatively low rates of vaccination (custody staff: 75th vs 25th percentile, 64% [95% CI, 62%-66%] vs 59% [95% CI, 57%-61%]; health care staff: 38% [95% CI, 36%-41%] vs 35% [95% CI, 31%-39%]).Conclusions and relevanceThis cohort study of California state prison custody and health care staff found that vaccination uptake plateaued at levels that posed ongoing risks of further outbreaks in the prisons and continuing transmission from prisons to surrounding communities. Prison staff decisions to forgo vaccination appear to be multifactorial, and vaccine mandates may be necessary to achieve adequate levels of immunity in this high-risk setting.