Quarantine alone or in combination with other public health measures to control COVID-19: a rapid review.


Journal

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews
ISSN: 1469-493X
Titre abrégé: Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100909747

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
08 04 2020
Historique:
entrez: 9 4 2020
pubmed: 9 4 2020
medline: 14 4 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a rapidly emerging disease that has been classified a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). To support WHO with their recommendations on quarantine, we conducted a rapid review on the effectiveness of quarantine during severe coronavirus outbreaks. We conducted a rapid review to assess the effects of quarantine (alone or in combination with other measures) of individuals who had contact with confirmed cases of COVID-19, who travelled from countries with a declared outbreak, or who live in regions with high transmission of the disease. An information specialist searched PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, WHO Global Index Medicus, Embase, and CINAHL on 12 February 2020 and updated the search on 12 March 2020. WHO provided records from daily searches in Chinese databases up to 16 March 2020. Cohort studies, case-control-studies, case series, time series, interrupted time series, and mathematical modelling studies that assessed the effect of any type of quarantine to control COVID-19. We also included studies on SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) and MERS (Middle East respiratory syndrome) as indirect evidence for the current coronavirus outbreak. Two review authors independently screened 30% of records; a single review author screened the remaining 70%. Two review authors screened all potentially relevant full-text publications independently. One review author extracted data and assessed evidence quality with GRADE and a second review author checked the assessment. We rated the certainty of evidence for the four primary outcomes: incidence, onward transmission, mortality, and resource use. We included 29 studies; 10 modelling studies on COVID-19, four observational studies and 15 modelling studies on SARS and MERS. Because of the diverse methods of measurement and analysis across the outcomes of interest, we could not conduct a meta-analysis and conducted a narrative synthesis. Due to the type of evidence found for this review, GRADE rates the certainty of the evidence as low to very low. Modeling studies consistently reported a benefit of the simulated quarantine measures, for example, quarantine of people exposed to confirmed or suspected cases averted 44% to 81% incident cases and 31% to 63% of deaths compared to no measures based on different scenarios (incident cases: 4 modelling studies on COVID-19, SARS; mortality: 2 modelling studies on COVID-19, SARS, low-certainty evidence). Very low-certainty evidence suggests that the earlier quarantine measures are implemented, the greater the cost savings (2 modelling studies on SARS). Very low-certainty evidence indicated that the effect of quarantine of travellers from a country with a declared outbreak on reducing incidence and deaths was small (2 modelling studies on SARS). When the models combined quarantine with other prevention and control measures, including school closures, travel restrictions and social distancing, the models demonstrated a larger effect on the reduction of new cases, transmissions and deaths than individual measures alone (incident cases: 4 modelling studies on COVID-19; onward transmission: 2 modelling studies on COVID-19; mortality: 2 modelling studies on COVID-19; low-certainty evidence). Studies on SARS and MERS were consistent with findings from the studies on COVID-19. Current evidence for COVID-19 is limited to modelling studies that make parameter assumptions based on the current, fragmented knowledge. Findings consistently indicate that quarantine is important in reducing incidence and mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic. Early implementation of quarantine and combining quarantine with other public health measures is important to ensure effectiveness. In order to maintain the best possible balance of measures, decision makers must constantly monitor the outbreak situation and the impact of the measures implemented. Testing in representative samples in different settings could help assess the true prevalence of infection, and would reduce uncertainty of modelling assumptions. This review was commissioned by WHO and supported by Danube-University-Krems.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a rapidly emerging disease that has been classified a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). To support WHO with their recommendations on quarantine, we conducted a rapid review on the effectiveness of quarantine during severe coronavirus outbreaks.
OBJECTIVES
We conducted a rapid review to assess the effects of quarantine (alone or in combination with other measures) of individuals who had contact with confirmed cases of COVID-19, who travelled from countries with a declared outbreak, or who live in regions with high transmission of the disease.
SEARCH METHODS
An information specialist searched PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, WHO Global Index Medicus, Embase, and CINAHL on 12 February 2020 and updated the search on 12 March 2020. WHO provided records from daily searches in Chinese databases up to 16 March 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Cohort studies, case-control-studies, case series, time series, interrupted time series, and mathematical modelling studies that assessed the effect of any type of quarantine to control COVID-19. We also included studies on SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) and MERS (Middle East respiratory syndrome) as indirect evidence for the current coronavirus outbreak.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened 30% of records; a single review author screened the remaining 70%. Two review authors screened all potentially relevant full-text publications independently. One review author extracted data and assessed evidence quality with GRADE and a second review author checked the assessment. We rated the certainty of evidence for the four primary outcomes: incidence, onward transmission, mortality, and resource use.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 29 studies; 10 modelling studies on COVID-19, four observational studies and 15 modelling studies on SARS and MERS. Because of the diverse methods of measurement and analysis across the outcomes of interest, we could not conduct a meta-analysis and conducted a narrative synthesis. Due to the type of evidence found for this review, GRADE rates the certainty of the evidence as low to very low. Modeling studies consistently reported a benefit of the simulated quarantine measures, for example, quarantine of people exposed to confirmed or suspected cases averted 44% to 81% incident cases and 31% to 63% of deaths compared to no measures based on different scenarios (incident cases: 4 modelling studies on COVID-19, SARS; mortality: 2 modelling studies on COVID-19, SARS, low-certainty evidence). Very low-certainty evidence suggests that the earlier quarantine measures are implemented, the greater the cost savings (2 modelling studies on SARS). Very low-certainty evidence indicated that the effect of quarantine of travellers from a country with a declared outbreak on reducing incidence and deaths was small (2 modelling studies on SARS). When the models combined quarantine with other prevention and control measures, including school closures, travel restrictions and social distancing, the models demonstrated a larger effect on the reduction of new cases, transmissions and deaths than individual measures alone (incident cases: 4 modelling studies on COVID-19; onward transmission: 2 modelling studies on COVID-19; mortality: 2 modelling studies on COVID-19; low-certainty evidence). Studies on SARS and MERS were consistent with findings from the studies on COVID-19.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence for COVID-19 is limited to modelling studies that make parameter assumptions based on the current, fragmented knowledge. Findings consistently indicate that quarantine is important in reducing incidence and mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic. Early implementation of quarantine and combining quarantine with other public health measures is important to ensure effectiveness. In order to maintain the best possible balance of measures, decision makers must constantly monitor the outbreak situation and the impact of the measures implemented. Testing in representative samples in different settings could help assess the true prevalence of infection, and would reduce uncertainty of modelling assumptions. This review was commissioned by WHO and supported by Danube-University-Krems.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32267544
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013574
pmc: PMC7141753
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

CD013574

Commentaires et corrections

Type : UpdateIn

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Références

JAMA. 2020 Apr 14;323(14):1339-1340
pubmed: 32108857
J Clin Epidemiol. 2021 Jan;129:138-150
pubmed: 32980429
Yale J Biol Med. 2005 Oct;78(5):329-34
pubmed: 17132339
Medicine (Baltimore). 2020 Jan;99(3):e18782
pubmed: 32011472
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2007 May;28(5):525-30
pubmed: 17464910
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017 Apr 11;114(15):4023-4028
pubmed: 28351976
Epidemiology. 2005 Nov;16(6):791-801
pubmed: 16222170
JAMA. 2003 Dec 24;290(24):3215-21
pubmed: 14693874
J Clin Med. 2020 Feb 07;9(2):
pubmed: 32046137
JAMA. 2020 Apr 7;323(13):1239-1242
pubmed: 32091533
J Theor Biol. 2004 Apr 7;227(3):369-79
pubmed: 15019504
J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 Jul;111:105-114
pubmed: 29432858
J Evid Based Med. 2020 Feb;13(1):3-7
pubmed: 32048815
Am J Epidemiol. 2006 Mar 1;163(5):479-85
pubmed: 16421244
BMC Public Health. 2018 May 2;18(1):574
pubmed: 29716568
J Med Virol. 2020 Jun;92(6):645-659
pubmed: 32141624
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020 Feb 28;69(8):216-219
pubmed: 32106216
BMJ. 2008 Apr 26;336(7650):924-6
pubmed: 18436948
Proc Biol Sci. 2004 Nov 7;271(1554):2223-32
pubmed: 15539347
Quant Biol. 2020;8(1):11-19
pubmed: 32219006
Epidemiol Health. 2020;42:e2020011
pubmed: 32164053
Emerg Infect Dis. 2005 Aug;11(8):1249-56
pubmed: 16102315
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Apr 20;101(16):6146-51
pubmed: 15071187
Proc Biol Sci. 2003 Oct 7;270(1528):1979-89
pubmed: 14561285
Med Decis Making. 2012 Sep-Oct;32(5):712-21
pubmed: 22990086
J Travel Med. 2020 May 18;27(3):
pubmed: 32109273
Emerg Infect Dis. 2006 Jan;12(1):15-22
pubmed: 16494711
Am J Public Health. 2007 Apr;97 Suppl 1:S98-100
pubmed: 17413071
J Theor Biol. 2007 Feb 21;244(4):729-36
pubmed: 17055533
BMJ. 2016 Oct 12;355:i4919
pubmed: 27733354
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2004 Mar;58(3):186-91
pubmed: 14966229
Influenza Other Respir Viruses. 2017 Sep;11(5):434-444
pubmed: 28703921
Math Biosci. 2005 Feb;193(2):205-21
pubmed: 15748730
BMC Infect Dis. 2014 Sep 04;14:480
pubmed: 25186370
Int J Infect Dis. 2020 Mar;92:214-217
pubmed: 32007643
Lancet. 2020 Feb 29;395(10225):664-666
pubmed: 32061311
Zhonghua Liu Xing Bing Xue Za Zhi. 2020 Feb 10;41(2):145-151
pubmed: 32064853
Math Biosci Eng. 2010 Jul;7(3):687-717
pubmed: 20578793
Emerg Infect Dis. 2005 Feb;11(2):278-82
pubmed: 15752447
Zhejiang Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2020 May 25;49(2):178-184
pubmed: 32391661
J Clin Epidemiol. 2020 May;121:20-28
pubmed: 31972274
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2021 Jul 19;376(1829):20200265
pubmed: 34053269
J Infect. 2005 Jun;50(5):386-93
pubmed: 15907545
Lancet. 2020 Mar 14;395(10227):912-920
pubmed: 32112714
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2003 Oct;57(10):766-9
pubmed: 14573569
J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Oct;62(10):1006-12
pubmed: 19631508

Auteurs

Barbara Nussbaumer-Streit (B)

Danube University Krems, Cochrane Austria, Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, Dr.-Karl-Dorrek-Str. 30, Krems, Austria, 3500.

Verena Mayr (V)

Danube University Krems, Cochrane Austria, Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, Dr.-Karl-Dorrek-Str. 30, Krems, Austria, 3500.

Andreea Iulia Dobrescu (AI)

Danube University Krems, Cochrane Austria, Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, Dr.-Karl-Dorrek-Str. 30, Krems, Austria, 3500.

Andrea Chapman (A)

Danube University Krems, Cochrane Austria, Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, Dr.-Karl-Dorrek-Str. 30, Krems, Austria, 3500.

Emma Persad (E)

Danube University Krems, Cochrane Austria, Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, Dr.-Karl-Dorrek-Str. 30, Krems, Austria, 3500.

Irma Klerings (I)

Danube University Krems, Cochrane Austria, Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, Dr.-Karl-Dorrek-Str. 30, Krems, Austria, 3500.

Gernot Wagner (G)

Danube University Krems, Cochrane Austria, Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, Dr.-Karl-Dorrek-Str. 30, Krems, Austria, 3500.

Uwe Siebert (U)

Health Services Research and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT - University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Department of Public Health, Hall in Tirol, Austria.
Oncotyrol - Center for Personalized Cancer Medicine, Division of Health Technology Assessment and Bioinformatics, Innsbruck, Austria.
Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Center for Health Decision Science, Department of Health Policy and Management, Boston, USA.
Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Institute for Technology Assessment and Department of Radiology, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Claudia Christof (C)

Danube University Krems, Cochrane Austria, Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, Dr.-Karl-Dorrek-Str. 30, Krems, Austria, 3500.

Casey Zachariah (C)

Danube University Krems, Cochrane Austria, Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, Dr.-Karl-Dorrek-Str. 30, Krems, Austria, 3500.

Gerald Gartlehner (G)

Danube University Krems, Cochrane Austria, Department for Evidence-based Medicine and Evaluation, Dr.-Karl-Dorrek-Str. 30, Krems, Austria, 3500.
RTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH