Dataset Information

Evaluation of China's Hubei control strategy for COVID-19 epidemic: an observational study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

To fight against COVID-19, many policymakers are wavering on stricter public health interventions. Examining the different strategies both in and out of China's Hubei province, which contained the epidemic in late February 2020, could yield valuable guidance for the management of future pandemics. This study assessed the response process and estimated the time-varying effects of the Hubei control strategy. Analysis of these strategies provides insights for the design and implementation of future policy interventions.

Methods

We retrospectively compared the spread and control of COVID-19 between China's Hubei (excluding Wuhan) and non-Hubei areas using data that includes case reports, human mobility, and public health interventions from 1 January to 29 February 2020. Static and dynamic risk assessment models were developed to statistically investigate the effects of the Hubei control strategy on the virus case growth after adjusting importation risk and policy response timing with the non-Hubei strategy as a control.

Results

The analysis detected much higher but differential importation risk in Hubei. The response timing largely coincided with the importation risk in non-Hubei areas, but Hubei areas showed an opposite pattern. Rather than a specific intervention assessment, a comprehensive comparison showed that the Hubei control strategy implemented severe interventions characterized by unprecedentedly strict and 'monitored' self-quarantine at home, while the non-Hubei strategy included physical distancing measures to reduce contact among individuals within or between populations. In contrast with the non-Hubei control strategy, the Hubei strategy showed a much higher, non-linear and gradually diminishing protective effect with at least 3 times fewer cases.

Conclusions

A risk-based control strategy was crucial to the design of an effective response to the COVID-19 outbreak. Our study demonstrates that the stricter Hubei strategy achieves a stronger controlling effect compared to other strategies. These findings highlight the health benefits and policy impacts of precise and differentiated strategies informed by constant monitoring of outbreak risk.

SUBMITTER: Liu Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8366153 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:We conducted a multicentre cross-sectional survey of COVID-19 patients to evaluate the acute psychological impact on the patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during isolation treatment based on online questionnaires from 2 February to 5 March 2020. A total of 460 COVID-19 patients from 13 medical centers in Hubei province were investigated for their mental health status using online questionnaires (including Patient Health Questionnaire-9, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7, Patient Health Questionnaire-15, and Insomnia Severity Index scales). Among all 460 COVID-19 patients, 187 (40.65%) of them were healthcare workers (HCWs). 297 (64.57%) of them were females. The most common psychological problems were somatization symptoms (66.09%, n = 304), followed by depression (53.48%, n = 246), anxiety (46.30%, n = 213), problems of insomnia (42.01%, n = 171), and then self-mutilating or suicidal thoughts (23.26%, n = 107). Of all the patients, 15.65% (n = 72) had severe somatization symptoms, and 2.83% (n = 13) had severe (almost every day) self-mutilating or suicidal thoughts. The most common psychological problems for HCWs were somatization symptoms (67.84%, n = 125), followed by depression (51.87%, n = 97), anxiety (44.92%, n = 84), problems of insomnia (36.18%, n = 55), and then self-mutilating or suicidal thoughts (20.86%, n = 39). Patients with lower education levels were found to be associated with higher incidence of self-mutilating or suicidal thoughts (odds ratio [OR], 2.68, 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.66-4.33 [P < 0.001]). Patients with abnormal body temperature were found to be associated with higher incidence of self-mutilating or suicidal thoughts (OR, 3.97, 95% CI, 2.07-7.63 [P < 0.001]), somatic symptoms (OR, 2.06, 95% CI, 1.20-3.55 [P = 0.009]) and insomnia (OR, 1.66, 95% CI, 1.04-2.65 [P = 0.033]). Those with suspected infected family members displayed a higher prevalence of anxiety than those without infected family members (OR, 1.61, 95% CI, 1.1-2.37 [P = 0.015]). Patients at the age of 18-44 years old had fewer somatic symptoms than those aged over 45 years old (OR, 1.91, 95% CI, 1.3-2.81 [P = 0.001]). In conclusion, COVID-19 patients tended to have a high prevalence of adverse psychological events. Early identification and intervention should be conducted to avoid extreme events such as self-mutilating or suicidal impulsivity for COVID-19 patients, especially for those with low education levels and females who have undergone divorce or bereavement.

Project description:Background:In the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the susceptibility of patients with rheumatic diseases to COVID-19 remains unclear. We aimed to investigate susceptibility to COVID-19 in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Methods:We did a multicentre retrospective study of patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases in Hubei province, the epicentre of the COVID-19 outbreak in China. Patients with rheumatic diseases were contacted through an automated telephone-based survey to investigate their susceptibility to COVID-19. Data about COVID-19 exposure or diagnosis were collected. Families with a documented history of COVID-19 exposure, as defined by having at least one family member diagnosed with COVID-19, were followed up by medical professionals to obtain detailed information, including sex, age, smoking history, past medical history, use of medications, and information related to COVID-19. Findings:Between March 20 and March 30, 2020, 6228 patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases were included in the study. The overall rate of COVID-19 in patients with an autoimmune rheumatic disease in our study population was 0·43% (27 of 6228 patients). We identified 42 families in which COVID-19 was diagnosed between Dec 20, 2019, and March 20, 2020, in either patients with a rheumatic disease or in a family member residing at the same physical address during the outbreak. Within these 42 families, COVID-19 was diagnosed in 27 (63%) of 43 patients with a rheumatic disease and in 28 (34%) of 83 of their family members with no rheumatic disease (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2·68 [95% CI 1·14-6·27]; p=0·023). Patients with rheumatic disease who were taking hydroxychloroquine had a lower risk of COVID-19 infection than patients taking other disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (OR 0·09 [95% CI 0·01-0·94]; p=0·044). Additionally, the risk of COVID-19 was increased with age (adjusted OR 1·04 [95%CI 1·01-1·06]; p=0·0081). Interpretation:Patients with autoimmune rheumatic disease might be more susceptible to COVID-19 infection than the general population. Funding:National Natural Science Foundation of China and the Tongji Hospital Clinical Research Flagship Program.

Project description:BackgroundInformation disclosure is a top priority for official responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. The timely and standardized information published by authorities as a response to the crisis can better inform the public and enable better preparations for the pandemic; however, there is limited evidence of any systematic analyses of the disclosed epidemic information. This in turn has important implications for risk communication.ObjectiveThis study aimed to describe and compare the officially released content regarding local epidemic situations as well as analyze the characteristics of information disclosure through local communication in major cities in China.MethodsThe 31 capital cities in mainland China were included in this city-level observational study. Data were retrieved from local municipalities and health commission websites as of March 18, 2020. A checklist was employed as a rapid qualitative assessment tool to analyze the information disclosure performance of each city. Descriptive analyses and data visualizations were produced to present and compare the comparative performances of the cities.ResultsIn total, 29 of 31 cities (93.5%) established specific COVID-19 webpages to disclose information. Among them, 12 of the city webpages were added to their corresponding municipal websites. A majority of the cities (21/31, 67.7%) published their first cases of infection in a timely manner on the actual day of confirmation. Regarding the information disclosures highlighted on the websites, news updates from local media or press briefings were the most prevalent (28/29, 96.6%), followed by epidemic surveillance (25/29, 86.2%), and advice for the public (25/29, 86.2%). Clarifications of misinformation and frequently asked questions were largely overlooked as only 2 cities provided this valuable information. The median daily update frequency of epidemic surveillance summaries was 1.2 times per day (IQR 1.0-1.3 times), and the majority of these summaries (18/25, 72.0%) also provided detailed information regarding confirmed cases. The reporting of key indicators in the epidemic surveillance summaries, as well as critical facts included in the confirmed case reports, varied substantially between cities. In general, the best performance in terms of timely reporting and the transparency of information disclosures were observed in the municipalities directly administered by the central government compared to the other cities.ConclusionsTimely and effective efforts to disclose information related to the COVID-19 epidemic have been made in major cities in China. Continued improvements to local authority reporting will contribute to more effective public communication and efficient public health research responses. The development of protocols and the standardization of epidemic message templates-as well as the use of uniform operating procedures to provide regular information updates-should be prioritized to ensure a coordinated national response.

Project description:IntroductionThe COVID-19 pandemic caused by SARS-CoV-2 places immense worldwide demand on healthcare services. Earlier identification of patients at risk of severe disease may allow intervention with experimental targeted treatments, mitigating the course of their disease and reducing critical care service demand.Methods and analysisThis prospective observational study of patients tested or treated for SARS-CoV-2, who are under the care of the tertiary University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust (UHSFT), captured data from admission to discharge; data collection commenced on 7 March 2020. Core demographic and clinical information, as well as results of disease-defining characteristics, was captured and recorded electronically from hospital clinical record systems at the point of testing. Manual data were collected and recorded by the clinical research team for assessments which are not part of the structured electronic healthcare record, for example, symptom onset date. Thereafter, participant records were continuously updated during hospital stay and their follow-up period. Participants aged >16 years were given the opportunity to provide consent for excess clinical sample storage with optional further biological sampling. These anonymised samples were linked to the clinical data in the Real-time Analytics for Clinical Trials platform and were stored within a biorepository at UHSFT.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from the HRA Specific Review Board (REC 20/HRA/2986) for waiver of informed consent for the database-only cohort; the procedures conform with the Declaration of Helsinki. The study design, protocol and patient-facing documentation for the biobanking arm of the study have been approved by North West Research Ethics Committee (REC 17/NW/0632) as an amendment to the National Institute for Health Research Southampton Clinical Research Facility-managed Southampton Research Biorepository. This study will be published as peer-reviewed articles and presented at conferences, presentations and workshops.