Randomized trials on non-pharmaceutical interventions for COVID-19: a scoping review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
We aimed at providing a systematic overview of randomised trials assessing non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to prevent COVID-19.Design
Scoping review.Methods
We included all randomised trials assessing NPIs to prevent COVID-19 in any country and setting registered in ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform using the COVID-evidence platform (until 17 August 2021). We searched for corresponding publications in MEDLINE/PubMed, Google Scholar, the Living Overview of Evidence platform, and the Cochrane COVID-19 registry as well as for results posted in registries (until 14 November 2021). Descriptive statistics using numbers and percentages were used in the narrative synthesis of the results.Results
We identified 41 randomised trials. Of them, 12 were completed (29.3%) including 9 with published results. The 41 trials planned to recruit a median of 1700 participants (IQR 588-9500, range 30-35 256 399) with a median planned duration of 8 months (IQR 3-14, range 1-24). Most came from the USA (n=11, 26.8%). The trials mostly assessed protective equipment (n=11, 26.8%), COVID-19-related information and education programmes (n=9, 22.0%), access to mass events under specific safety measures (n=5, 12.2%), testing and screening strategies (n=5, 12.2%) and hygiene management (n=5, 12.2%).Conclusions
Worldwide, 41 randomised trials assessing NPIs have been initiated with published results available to inform policy decisions for only 9 of them. A long-term research agenda including behavioural, environmental, social and systems level interventions is urgently needed to guide policies and practices in the current and future public health emergencies.
SUBMITTER: Hirt J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8804305 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Infectious diseases and human behavior are intertwined. On one side, our movements and interactions are the engines of transmission. On the other, the unfolding of viruses might induce changes to our daily activities. While intuitive, our understanding of such feedback loop is still limited. Before COVID-19 the literature on the subject was mainly theoretical and largely missed validation. The main issue was the lack of empirical data capturing behavioral change induced by diseases. Things have dramatically changed in 2020. Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) have been the key weapon against the SARS-CoV-2 virus and affected virtually any societal process. Travel bans, events cancellation, social distancing, curfews, and lockdowns have become unfortunately very familiar. The scale of the emergency, the ease of survey as well as crowdsourcing deployment guaranteed by the latest technology, several Data for Good programs developed by tech giants, major mobile phone providers, and other companies have allowed unprecedented access to data describing behavioral changes induced by the pandemic. Here, I review some of the vast literature written on the subject of NPIs during the COVID-19 pandemic. In doing so, I analyze 348 articles written by more than 2518 authors in the first 12 months of the emergency. While the large majority of the sample was obtained by querying PubMed, it includes also a hand-curated list. Considering the focus, and methodology I have classified the sample into seven main categories: epidemic models, surveys, comments/perspectives, papers aiming to quantify the effects of NPIs, reviews, articles using data proxies to measure NPIs, and publicly available datasets describing NPIs. I summarize the methodology, data used, findings of the articles in each category and provide an outlook highlighting future challenges as well as opportunities.
| S-EPMC7881715 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectiveThe outbreak of the current pandemic begun from the first individual of a 55-year old from Hubei province in China, the disease instigated by the new coronavirus spreading across the world. Scientists presently speculate this coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, originated in a bat and by one way or another jumped to another creature, potentially the pangolin, which at that point gave it to people. The ailment is currently spreading between individuals with no animal delegate. Researchers are struggling to follow the infection back to where it started to become familiar with its spread. In the event that, for example, specialists can locate the soonest cases, they might have the option to distinguish the creature have where the infection hides. In March and April 2020, researchers detailed that this virus created normally. Coronavirus has been become of the serious global phenomena in the recent years and has negative effects in the entire world health and economy. The virus is believed to have been associated with a host animal which human contracted. Subsequently, human-to-human infection began. Through migration as humans have become complex with easy mobility the disease has traveled to the entire continent. Now, numerous scientist are going on in the hope of obtaining medication and vaccination to prevent the spread of the disease and mortality of the disease. It is important that we obtain quantitative and qualitative information about the etiology of this disease which is crucial. Mathematical modeling is capable of providing qualitative information on many parameters that guides the decision making of health practitioners. In this work we focus the optimal control of COVID-19 with the help of Non Pharmaceutical Interventions (NPIs). To find the role of factors/parameters in the transmission of the syndrome we find R0; the ratio of reproduction for the proposed model.MethodsTo find the role of parameters in the transmission of the syndrome we find R0; the ratio of reproduction for the proposed model. On the basis of sensitivity indices of the parameters we apply Non Pharmaceutical Interventions(NPIs) to control the sensitive parameters and hence formulate the optimal control mode. With the help of Hamiltonian and Lagrangian we minimize the density of contaminated stuff and infected human population.ResultsWe focus the optimal control of COVID-19 with the help of Non Pharmaceutical Interventions(NPIs). On the basis of sensitivity indices of the parameters we apply Non Pharmaceutical Interventions(NPIs) to control the sensitive parameters and hence formulate the optimal control model. The major NPIs are, STAY HOME, SANITIZER (wash hands), EARLY CASE DETECTION (PCR Test) and FACE MASK. These NPIs helps in mitigation and reducing the size of outbreak of the disease.ConclusionWe check the existence of the optimal solution for the system. At the end, Using matlab we produce numerical simulations for validation of results of control variables. The results demonstrate that if there is no control (variables/interventios), 900 out 1000 susceptible individuals may be infected (exposed) in very short period. As such a circumstances no agency fighting against COVID-19 could be successful due to its limited resources.
| S-EPMC7339477 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionCoronavirus disease (COVID-19) is associated with a high incidence of thrombosis and mortality despite standard anticoagulant thromboprophylaxis. There is equipoise regarding the optimal dose of anticoagulant intervention in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 and consequently, immediate answers from high-quality randomized trials are needed.MethodsThe World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform was searched on June 17, 2020 for randomized controlled trials comparing increased dose to standard dose anticoagulant interventions in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Two authors independently screened the full records for eligibility and extracted data in duplicate.ResultsA total of 20 trials were included in the review. All trials are open label, 5 trials use an adaptive design, 1 trial uses a factorial design, 2 trials combine multi-arm parallel group and factorial designs in flexible platform trials, and at least 15 trials have multiple study sites. With individual target sample sizes ranging from 30 to 3000 participants, the pooled sample size of all included trials is 12 568 participants. Two trials include only intensive care unit patients, and 10 trials base patient eligibility on elevated D-dimer levels. Therapeutic intensity anticoagulation is evaluated in 14 trials. All-cause mortality is part of the primary outcome in 14 trials.DiscussionSeveral trials evaluate different dose regimens of anticoagulant interventions in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Because these trials compete for sites and study participants, a collaborative effort is needed to complete trials faster, conduct pooled analyses and bring effective interventions to patients more quickly.
| S-EPMC9906402 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Several non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) have been implemented across the world to control the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. Social distancing (SD) interventions applied so far have included school closures, remote working and quarantine. These measures have been shown to have large impacts on pandemic influenza transmission. However, there has been comparatively little examination of such measures for COVID-19. Methods: We examined the existing literature, and collated data, on implementation of NPIs to examine their effects on the COVID-19 pandemic so far. Data on NPIs were collected from official government websites as well as from media sources. Results: Measures such as travel restrictions have been implemented in multiple countries and appears to have slowed the geographic spread of COVID-19 and reduced initial case numbers. We find that, due to the relatively sparse information on the differences with and without interventions, it is difficult to quantitatively assess the efficacy of many interventions. Similarly, whilst the comparison to other pandemic diseases such as influenza can be helpful, there are key differences that could affect the efficacy of similar NPIs. Conclusions: The timely implementation of control measures is key to their success and must strike a balance between early enough application to reduce the peak of the epidemic and ensuring that they can be feasibly maintained for an appropriate duration. Such measures can have large societal impacts and they need to be appropriately justified to the population. As the pandemic of COVID-19 progresses, quantifying the impact of interventions will be a vital consideration for the appropriate use of mitigation strategies.
| S-EPMC7255913 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo evaluate which non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) have been more and less effective in controlling the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsWe performed a systematic review of published and unpublished empirical studies, either observational or interventional, analysing the comparative effectiveness of NPIs against the COVID-19 pandemic. We searched Embase/Medline and medRxiv to identify the relevant literature.ResultsWe identified 34 studies. During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, school closing was the most effective NPI, followed by workplace closing, business and venue closing and public event bans. Public information campaigns and mask wearing requirements were also effective in controlling the pandemic while being less disruptive for the population than other NPIs. There was no evidence on the effectiveness of public transport closure, testing and contact tracing strategies and quarantining or isolation of individuals. Early implementation was associated with a higher effectiveness in reducing COVID-19 cases and deaths, while general stringency of the NPIs was not.ConclusionsIn this systematic review, we found that school closing, followed by workplace closing, business and venue closing and public event bans were the most effective NPIs in controlling the spread of COVID-19. An early response and a combination of specific social distancing measures are effective at reducing COVID-19 cases and deaths. Continuous monitoring of NPIs effectiveness is needed in order to adapt decision making.
| S-EPMC8214911 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic has forced societies across the world to resort to social distancing to slow the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Due to the economic impacts of social distancing, there is growing desire to relax these measures. To characterize a range of possible strategies for control and to understand their consequences, we performed an optimal control analysis of a mathematical model of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Given that the pandemic is already underway and controls have already been initiated, we calibrated our model to data from the USA and focused our analysis on optimal controls from May 2020 through December 2021. We found that a major factor that differentiates strategies that prioritize lives saved versus reduced time under control is how quickly control is relaxed once social distancing restrictions expire in May 2020. Strategies that maintain control at a high level until at least summer 2020 allow for tapering of control thereafter and minimal deaths, whereas strategies that relax control in the short term lead to fewer options for control later and a higher likelihood of exceeding hospital capacity. Our results also highlight that the potential scope for controlling COVID-19 until a vaccine is available depends on epidemiological parameters about which there is still considerable uncertainty, including the basic reproduction number and the effectiveness of social distancing. In light of those uncertainties, our results do not constitute a quantitative forecast and instead provide a qualitative portrayal of possible outcomes from alternative approaches to control.
| S-EPMC7473596 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNon-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) are mitigation strategies used to reduce the spread of transmissible diseases. The relative effectiveness of specific NPIs remains uncertain.MethodsWe used state-level Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) case and mortality data between January 19, 2020 and March 7, 2021 to model NPI policy effectiveness. Empirically derived breakpoints in case and mortality velocities were used to identify periods of stable, decreasing, or increasing COVID-19 burden. The associations between NPI adoption and subsequent decreases in case or death velocities were estimated using generalized linear models accounting for weekly variability shared across states. State-level NPI policies included: stay at home order, indoor public gathering ban (mild >10 or severe ≤10), indoor restaurant dining ban, and public mask mandate.Results28,602,830 cases and 511,899 deaths were recorded. The odds of a decrease in COVID-19 case velocity were significantly elevated for stay at home (OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.63-2.52), indoor dining ban (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.25-2.10), public mask mandate (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.47-3.23), and severe gathering ban (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.31-2.16). In mutually adjusted models, odds remained elevated for stay at home (AOR 1.47, 95% CI 1.04-2.07) and public mask mandate (AOR = 2.27, 95% CI 1.51-3.41). Stay at home (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.53-2.62; AOR 1.89, 95% CI 1.25-2.87) was also associated with greater likelihood of decrease in death velocity in unadjusted and adjusted models.ConclusionsNPIs employed in the U.S. during the COVID-19 pandemic, most significantly stay at home orders, were associated with decreased COVID-19 burden.
| S-EPMC8491859 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic has transformed almost every facet of human society throughout the world. Against an emerging, highly transmissible disease, governments worldwide have implemented non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to slow the spread of the virus. Examples of such interventions include community actions, such as school closures or restrictions on mass gatherings, individual actions including mask wearing and self-quarantine, and environmental actions such as cleaning public facilities. We present the Worldwide Non-pharmaceutical Interventions Tracker for COVID-19 (WNTRAC), a comprehensive dataset consisting of over 6,000 NPIs implemented worldwide since the start of the pandemic. WNTRAC covers NPIs implemented across 261 countries and territories, and classifies NPIs into a taxonomy of 16 NPI types. NPIs are automatically extracted daily from Wikipedia articles using natural language processing techniques and then manually validated to ensure accuracy and veracity. We hope that the dataset will prove valuable for policymakers, public health leaders, and researchers in modeling and analysis efforts to control the spread of COVID-19.
| S-EPMC7994304 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The information set from which individuals make their decision on vaccination includes signals from trusted agents, such as governments, community leaders and the media. By implementing restrictions, or by relaxing them, governments can provide a signal about the underlying risk of the pandemic and indirectly affect vaccination take-up. Rather than focusing on measures specifically designed to increase vaccine acceptance, this paper studies how governments' non-pharmaceutical policy responses to the pandemic can modify the degree of preventive health behavior, including vaccination. To do so, we use repeated waves of a global survey on COVID-19 Beliefs, Behaviors and Norms covering 18 countries from October 2020 to March 2021. Controlling for the usual determinants, we explore how individuals' willingness to get vaccinated is affected by changes in government restriction measures (as measured by the Oxford Stringency Index). This relationship is mediated by individual characteristics, social norms (social pressure to conform with what most people do), and trust in government institutions. Our results point to a complex picture as the implementation of restrictions is associated with increased acceptance in some contexts and decreased acceptance in others. The stringency of government restrictions has significant positive correlations with vaccine acceptance in contexts of weak social norms of vaccine acceptance and lower trust in government. In countries or communities with tighter social norms and high trust in health authorities, vaccine acceptance is high but less sensitive to changes in policies. These results suggest that the effect of government policy stringency is stronger among individuals who report lower trust and weaker social norms of vaccine acceptance.
| S-EPMC9840231 | biostudies-literature
Project description:On 11 March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) a pandemic1. The strategies based on non-pharmaceutical interventions that were used to contain the outbreak in China appear to be effective2, but quantitative research is still needed to assess the efficacy of non-pharmaceutical interventions and their timings3. Here, using epidemiological data on COVID-19 and anonymized data on human movement4,5, we develop a modelling framework that uses daily travel networks to simulate different outbreak and intervention scenarios across China. We estimate that there were a total of 114,325 cases of COVID-19 (interquartile range 76,776-164,576) in mainland China as of 29 February 2020. Without non-pharmaceutical interventions, we predict that the number of cases would have been 67-fold higher (interquartile range 44-94-fold) by 29 February 2020, and we find that the effectiveness of different interventions varied. We estimate that early detection and isolation of cases prevented more infections than did travel restrictions and contact reductions, but that a combination of non-pharmaceutical interventions achieved the strongest and most rapid effect. According to our model, the lifting of travel restrictions from 17 February 2020 does not lead to an increase in cases across China if social distancing interventions can be maintained, even at a limited level of an on average 25% reduction in contact between individuals that continues until late April. These findings improve our understanding of the effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19, and will inform response efforts across the world.
| S-EPMC7116778 | biostudies-literature