scholarly journals Estimating the burden of SARS-CoV-2 in France

Science ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 369 (6500) ◽  
pp. 208-211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henrik Salje ◽  
Cécile Tran Kiem ◽  
Noémie Lefrancq ◽  
Noémie Courtejoie ◽  
Paolo Bosetti ◽  
...  

France has been heavily affected by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic and went into lockdown on 17 March 2020. Using models applied to hospital and death data, we estimate the impact of the lockdown and current population immunity. We find that 2.9% of infected individuals are hospitalized and 0.5% of those infected die (95% credible interval: 0.3 to 0.9%), ranging from 0.001% in those under 20 years of age to 8.3% in those 80 years of age or older. Across all ages, men are more likely to be hospitalized, enter intensive care, and die than women. The lockdown reduced the reproductive number from 2.90 to 0.67 (77% reduction). By 11 May 2020, when interventions are scheduled to be eased, we project that 3.5 million people (range: 2.1 million to 6.0 million), or 5.3% of the population (range: 3.3 to 9.3%), will have been infected. Population immunity appears to be insufficient to avoid a second wave if all control measures are released at the end of the lockdown.

Author(s):  
Henrik Salje ◽  
Cécile Tran Kiem ◽  
Noémie Lefrancq ◽  
Noémie Courtejoie ◽  
Paolo Bosetti ◽  
...  

AbstractFrance has been heavily affected by the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic and went into lockdown on the 17th March 2020. Using models applied to hospital and death data, we estimate the impact of the lockdown and current population immunity. We find 2.6% of infected individuals are hospitalized and 0.53% die, ranging from 0.001% in those <20y to 8.3% in those >80y. Across all ages, men are more likely to be hospitalized, enter intensive care, and die than women. The lockdown reduced the reproductive number from 3.3 to 0.5 (84% reduction). By 11 May, when interventions are scheduled to be eased, we project 3.7 million (range: 2.3-6.7) people, 5.7% of the population, will have been infected. Population immunity appears insufficient to avoid a second wave if all control measures are released at the end of the lockdown.


Biology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 80
Author(s):  
Wiriya Mahikul ◽  
Palang Chotsiri ◽  
Kritchavat Ploddi ◽  
Wirichada Pan-ngum

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has spread rapidly worldwide. This study aimed to assess and predict the incidence of COVID-19 in Thailand, including the preparation and evaluation of intervention strategies. An SEIR (susceptible, exposed, infected, recovered) model was implemented with model parameters estimated using the Bayesian approach. The model’s projections showed that the highest daily reported incidence of COVID-19 would be approximately 140 cases (95% credible interval, CrI: 83–170 cases) by the end of March 2020. After Thailand declared an emergency decree, the numbers of new cases and case fatalities decreased, with no new imported cases. According to the model’s predictions, the incidence would be zero at the end of June if non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) were strictly and widely implemented. These stringent NPIs reduced the effective reproductive number (Rt) to 0.73 per day (95% CrI: 0.53–0.93) during April and May. Sensitivity analysis showed that contact rate, hand washing, and face mask wearing effectiveness were the parameters that most influenced the number of reported daily new cases. Our evaluation shows that Thailand’s intervention strategies have been highly effective in mitigating disease propagation. Continuing with these strict disease prevention behaviors could minimize the risk of a new COVID-19 outbreak in Thailand.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S257-S258
Author(s):  
Raul Davaro ◽  
alwyn rapose

Abstract Background The ongoing pandemic of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections has led to 105690 cases and 7647 deaths in Massachusetts as of June 16. Methods The study was conducted at Saint Vincent Hospital, an academic health medical center in Worcester, Massachusetts. The institutional review board approved this case series as minimal-risk research using data collected for routine clinical practice and waived the requirement for informed consent. All consecutive patients who were sufficiently medically ill to require hospital admission with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection by positive result on polymerase chain reaction testing of a nasopharyngeal sample were included. Results A total of 109 consecutive patients with COVID 19 were admitted between March 15 and May 31. Sixty one percent were men, the mean age of the cohort was 67. Forty one patients (37%) were transferred from nursing homes. Twenty seven patients died (24%) and the majority of the dead patients were men (62%). Fifty one patients (46%) required admission to the medical intensive care unit and 34 necessitated mechanical ventilation, twenty two patients on mechanical ventilation died (63%). The most common co-morbidities were essential hypertension (65%), obesity (60%), diabetes (33%), chronic kidney disease (22%), morbid obesity (11%), congestive heart failure (16%) and COPD (14%). Five patients required hemodialysis. Fifty five patients received hydroxychloroquine, 24 received tocilizumab, 20 received convalescent plasma and 16 received remdesivir. COVID 19 appeared in China in late 2019 and was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization on March 11, 2020. Our study showed a high mortality in patients requiring mechanical ventilation (43%) as opposed to those who did not (5.7%). Hypertension, diabetes and obesity were highly prevalent in this aging population. Our cohort was too small to explore the impact of treatment with remdesivir, tocilizumab or convalescent plasma. Conclusion In this cohort obesity, diabetes and essential hypertension are risk factors associated with high mortality. Patients admitted to the intensive care unit who need mechanical ventilation have a mortality approaching 50 %. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures


Author(s):  
Chaolong Wang ◽  
Li Liu ◽  
Xingjie Hao ◽  
Huan Guo ◽  
Qi Wang ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTBACKGROUNDWe described the epidemiological features of the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) outbreak, and evaluated the impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions on the epidemic in Wuhan, China.METHODSIndividual-level data on 25,961 laboratory-confirmed Covid-19 cases reported through February 18, 2020 were extracted from the municipal Notifiable Disease Report System. Based on key events and interventions, we divided the epidemic into four periods: before January 11, January 11-22, January 23 - February 1, and February 2-18. We compared epidemiological characteristics across periods and different demographic groups. We developed a susceptible-exposed-infectious-recovered model to study the epidemic and evaluate the impact of interventions.RESULTSThe median age of the cases was 57 years and 50.3% were women. The attack rate peaked in the third period and substantially declined afterwards across geographic regions, sex and age groups, except for children (age <20) whose attack rate continued to increase. Healthcare workers and elderly people had higher attack rates and severity risk increased with age. The effective reproductive number dropped from 3.86 (95% credible interval 3.74 to 3.97) before interventions to 0.32 (0.28 to 0.37) post interventions. The interventions were estimated to prevent 94.5% (93.7 to 95.2%) infections till February 18. We found that at least 59% of infected cases were unascertained in Wuhan, potentially including asymptomatic and mild-symptomatic cases.CONCLUSIONSConsiderable countermeasures have effectively controlled the Covid-19 outbreak in Wuhan. Special efforts are needed to protect vulnerable populations, including healthcare workers, elderly and children. Estimation of unascertained cases has important implications on continuing surveillance and interventions.


2011 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wuchun Cao ◽  
Sake J. De Vlas ◽  
Jan H. Richardus

This paper provides a review of a recently published series of studies that give a detailed and comprehensive documentation of the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) epidemic in mainland China, which severely struck the country in the spring of 2003. The epidemic spanned a large geographical extent but clustered in two areas: first in Guangdong Province, and about 3 months later in Beijing with its surrounding areas. Reanalysis of all available epidemiological data resulted in a total of 5327 probable cases of SARS, of whom 343 died. The resulting case fatality ratio (CFR) of 6.4% was less than half of that in other SARS-affected countries or areas, and this difference could only partly be explained by younger age of patients and higher number of community acquired infections. Analysis of the impact of interventions demonstrated that strong political commitment and a centrally coordinated response was the most important factor to control SARS in mainland China, whereas the most stringent control measures were all initiated when the epidemic was already dying down. The long-term economic consequence of the epidemic was limited, much consumption was merely postponed, but for Beijing irrecoverable losses to the tourist sector were considerable. An important finding from a cohort study was that many former SARS patients currently suffer from avascular osteo­necrosis, as a consequence of the treatment with corticosteroids during their infection. The SARS epidemic provided valuable information and lessons relevant in controlling outbreaks of newly emerging infectious diseases, and has led to fundamental reforms of the Chinese health system. In particular, a comprehensive nation-wide internet-based disease reporting system was established.


2020 ◽  
Vol 33 (11) ◽  
pp. 733
Author(s):  
Vasco Ricoca Peixoto ◽  
André Vieira ◽  
Pedro Aguiar ◽  
Carlos Carvalho ◽  
Daniel Rhys Thomas ◽  
...  

Introduction: Portugal took early action to control the COVID-19 epidemic, initiating lockdown measures on March 16th when it recorded only 62 cases of COVID-19 per million inhabitants and reported no deaths. The Portuguese public complied quickly, reducing their overall mobility by 80%. The aim of this study was to estimate the initial impact of the lockdown in Portugal in terms of the reduction of the burden on the healthcare system.Material and Methods: We forecasted epidemic curves for: Cases, hospital inpatients (overall and in intensive care), and deaths without lockdown, assuming that the impact of containment measures would start 14 days after initial lockdown was implemented. We used exponential smoothing models for deaths, intensive care and hospitalizations and an ARIMA model for number of cases. Models were selected considering fitness to the observed data up to the 31st March 2020. We then compared observed (with intervention) and forecasted curves (without intervention).Results: Between April 1st and April 15th, there were 146 fewer deaths (-25%), 5568 fewer cases (-23%) and, as of April 15th, there were 519 fewer intensive care inpatients (-69%) than forecasted without the lockdown. On April 15th, the number of intensive care inpatients could have reached 748, three times higher than the observed value (229) if the intervention had been delayed.Discussion: If the lockdown had not been implemented in mid-March, Portugal intensive care capacity (528 beds) would have likely been breached during the first half of April. The lockdown seems to have been effective in reducing transmission of SARS-CoV-2, serious COVID-19 disease, and associated mortality, thus decreasing demand on health services.Conclusion: An early lockdown allowed time for the National Health Service to mobilize resources and acquire personal protective equipment, increase testing, contact tracing and hospital and intensive care capacity and to promote broad prevention and control measures. When lifting more stringent measures, strong surveillance and communication strategies that mobilize individual prevention efforts are necessary.


2014 ◽  
Vol 35 (7) ◽  
pp. 810-817 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyle B. Enfield ◽  
Nujhat N. Huq ◽  
Megan F. Gosseling ◽  
Darla J. Low ◽  
Kevin C. Hazen ◽  
...  

ObjectiveWe describe the efficacy of enhanced infection control measures, including those recommended in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s 2012 carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) toolkit, to control concurrent outbreaks of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (CPE) and extensively drug-resistantAcinetobacter baumannii(XDR-AB).DesignBefore-after intervention study.SettingFifteen-bed surgical trauma intensive care unit (ICU).MethodsWe investigated the impact of enhanced infection control measures in response to clusters of CPE and XDR-AB infections in an ICU from April 2009 to March 2010. Polymerase chain reaction was used to detect the presence ofblaKPCand resistance plasmids in CRE. Pulsed-field gel electrophoresis was performed to assess XDR-AB clonality. Enhanced infection-control measures were implemented in response to ongoing transmission of CPE and a new outbreak of XDR-AB. Efficacy was evaluated by comparing the incidence rate (IR) of CPE and XDR-AB before and after the implementation of these measures.ResultsThe IR of CPE for the 12 months before the implementation of enhanced measures was 7.77 cases per 1,000 patient-days, whereas the IR of XDR-AB for the 3 months before implementation was 6.79 cases per 1,000 patient-days. All examined CPE shared endemicblaKPCresistance plasmids, and 6 of the 7 XDR-AB isolates were clonal. Following institution of enhanced infection control measures, the CPE IR decreased to 1.22 cases per 1,000 patient-days (P= .001), and no more cases of XDR-AB were identified.ConclusionsUse of infection control measures described in the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s 2012 CRE toolkit was associated with a reduction in the IR of CPE and an interruption in XDR-AB transmission.


Author(s):  
Nicholas G. Davies ◽  
Adam J. Kucharski ◽  
Rosalind M. Eggo ◽  
Amy Gimma ◽  
W. John Edmunds ◽  
...  

AbstractBackgroundNon-pharmaceutical interventions have been implemented to reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the UK. Projecting the size of an unmitigated epidemic and the potential effect of different control measures has been critical to support evidence-based policymaking during the early stages of the epidemic.MethodsWe used a stochastic age-structured transmission model to explore a range of intervention scenarios, including the introduction of school closures, social distancing, shielding of elderly groups, self-isolation of symptomatic cases, and extreme “lockdown”-type restrictions. We simulated different durations of interventions and triggers for introduction, as well as combinations of interventions. For each scenario, we projected estimated new cases over time, patients requiring inpatient and critical care (intensive care unit, ICU) treatment, and deaths.FindingsWe found that mitigation measures aimed at reducing transmission would likely have decreased the reproduction number, but not sufficiently to prevent ICU demand from exceeding NHS availability. To keep ICU bed demand below capacity in the model, more extreme restrictions were necessary. In a scenario where “lockdown”-type interventions were put in place to reduce transmission, these interventions would need to be in place for a large proportion of the coming year in order to prevent healthcare demand exceeding availability.InterpretationThe characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 mean that extreme measures are likely required to bring the epidemic under control and to prevent very large numbers of deaths and an excess of demand on hospital beds, especially those in ICUs.Research in ContextEvidence before this studyAs countries have moved from early containment efforts to planning for the introduction of large-scale non-pharmaceutical interventions to control COVID-19 outbreaks, epidemic modelling studies have explored the potential for extensive social distancing measures to curb transmission. However, it remains unclear how different combinations of interventions, timings, and triggers for the introduction and lifting of control measures may affect the impact of the epidemic on health services, and what the range of uncertainty associated with these estimates would be.Added value of this studyUsing a stochastic, age-structured epidemic model, we explored how eight different intervention scenarios could influence the number of new cases and deaths, as well as intensive care beds required over the projected course of the epidemic. We also assessed the potential impact of local versus national targeting of interventions, reduction in leisure events, impact of increased childcare by grandparents, and timing of triggers for different control measures. We simulated multiple realisations for each scenario to reflect uncertainty in possible epidemic trajectories.Implications of all the available evidenceOur results support early modelling findings, and subsequent empirical observations, that in the absence of control measures, a COVID-19 epidemic could quickly overwhelm a healthcare system. We found that even a combination of moderate interventions – such as school closures, shielding of older groups and self-isolation – would be unlikely to prevent an epidemic that would far exceed available ICU capacity in the UK. Intermittent periods of more intensive lockdown-type measures are predicted to be effective for preventing the healthcare system from being overwhelmed.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rapeepong Suphanchaimat ◽  
Natthaprang Nittayasoot ◽  
Panithee Thammawijaya ◽  
Pard Teekasap ◽  
Kamnuan Ungchusak

Abstract Background: Thailand experienced the first wave of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) during March-May 2020 and was now facing the second wave of COVID-19 since December 2020. For the second wave, the intensity was more pronounced. The area faced the greatest hit was Samut Sakhon, a main migrant-receiving province in the country. Thus, the Thai Ministry of Public Health (MOPH) was now considering the initiation of vaccination strategies in combination with active face finding (ACF) in the epidemic area. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of various vaccination and ACF policy scenarios in terms of case reduction and deaths averted.Methods: The study obtained data mainly from the Division of Epidemiology, Department of Disease Control (DDC), MOPH. Deterministic system dynamics and compartmental models were exercised. Basic reproductive number (R0) was estimated at 3 from the beginning. Vaccine efficacy against disease transmission was assumed to be 50%. A total of 10,000 people were estimated as an initial population size.Results: The findings showed that the greater the vaccination coverage was, the smaller the size of incident and cumulative cases. Compared with no-vaccination and no-ACF scenario, the 90%-vaccination coverage combined with 90%-ACF coverage contributed a reduction of cumulative cases by 33%. The case reduction benefit would be greater when R0 was smaller (⁓53% and ⁓51% when R0 equated 2 and 1.5 respectively).Conclusion: This study reaffirmed the idea that a combination of vaccination and ACF measures contributed to favourable results in reducing the number of COVID-19 cases and deaths, relative to the implementation of only a single measure. The greater the vaccination and ACF coverage was, the greater the volume of cases could be saved. Though we demonstrated the benefit of vaccination strategies in this setting, the actual implementation needs to consider many more policy angles, such as social acceptability, cost-effectiveness and operational feasibility. Further studies that address these topics based on empirical evidence are of great value.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document