Evaluating intervention strategies in controlling coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) spread in care homes: An agent-based model.


Journal

Infection control and hospital epidemiology
ISSN: 1559-6834
Titre abrégé: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8804099

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
09 2021
Historique:
pubmed: 15 12 2020
medline: 24 9 2021
entrez: 14 12 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Care homes are vulnerable to widespread transmission of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) with poor outcomes for staff and residents. Infection control interventions in care homes need to not only be effective in containing the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) but also feasible to implement in this special setting which is both a healthcare institution and a home. We developed an agent-based model that simulates the transmission dynamics of COVID-19 via contacts between individuals, including residents, staff members, and visitors in a care home setting. We explored a representative care home in Scotland in our base case and explore other care home setups in an uncertainty analysis. We evaluated the effectiveness of a range of intervention strategies in controlling the spread of COVID-19. In the presence of the reference interventions that have been implemented in many care homes, including testing of new admissions, isolation of symptomatic residents, and restricted public visiting, routine testing of staff appears to be the most effective and practical approach. Routine testing of residents is no more effective as a reference strategy while routine testing of both staff and residents only shows a negligible additive effect. Modeling results are very sensitive to transmission probability per contact, but the qualitative finding is robust to varying parameter values in our uncertainty analysis. Our model predictions suggest that routine testing should target staff in care homes in conjunction with adherence to strict hand hygiene and using personal protective equipment to reduce risk of transmission per contact.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Care homes are vulnerable to widespread transmission of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) with poor outcomes for staff and residents. Infection control interventions in care homes need to not only be effective in containing the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) but also feasible to implement in this special setting which is both a healthcare institution and a home.
METHODS
We developed an agent-based model that simulates the transmission dynamics of COVID-19 via contacts between individuals, including residents, staff members, and visitors in a care home setting. We explored a representative care home in Scotland in our base case and explore other care home setups in an uncertainty analysis. We evaluated the effectiveness of a range of intervention strategies in controlling the spread of COVID-19.
RESULTS
In the presence of the reference interventions that have been implemented in many care homes, including testing of new admissions, isolation of symptomatic residents, and restricted public visiting, routine testing of staff appears to be the most effective and practical approach. Routine testing of residents is no more effective as a reference strategy while routine testing of both staff and residents only shows a negligible additive effect. Modeling results are very sensitive to transmission probability per contact, but the qualitative finding is robust to varying parameter values in our uncertainty analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
Our model predictions suggest that routine testing should target staff in care homes in conjunction with adherence to strict hand hygiene and using personal protective equipment to reduce risk of transmission per contact.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33308354
pii: S0899823X20013690
doi: 10.1017/ice.2020.1369
pmc: PMC7783094
doi:

Types de publication

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

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1060-1070

Commentaires et corrections

Type : ErratumIn

Références

BMJ Open. 2018 Jan 21;8(1):e017353
pubmed: 29358419
PLoS Med. 2008 Oct 28;5(10):e200
pubmed: 18959470
BMC Infect Dis. 2020 Oct 28;20(1):799
pubmed: 33115427
PLoS One. 2012;7(1):e29757
pubmed: 22238650
Int J Infect Dis. 2020 Apr;93:284-286
pubmed: 32145466
Ann Intern Med. 2016 Jan 19;164(2):84-92
pubmed: 26595252
J Assoc Med Microbiol Infect Dis Can. 2020 Dec 31;5(4):223-234
pubmed: 36340059
Emerg Infect Dis. 2020 Aug;26(8):1740-1748
pubmed: 32343222
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020 Apr 03;69(13):377-381
pubmed: 32240128
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020 May 29;69(21):651-655
pubmed: 32463809
Nat Med. 2020 May;26(5):672-675
pubmed: 32296168
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020 Aug 11;69(32):1095-1099
pubmed: 32790655
PLoS Comput Biol. 2021 Jul 26;17(7):e1009149
pubmed: 34310589
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Mar 25;105(12):4639-44
pubmed: 18332436
Maturitas. 2020 Nov;141:46-52
pubmed: 33036702
BMJ Open. 2020 Aug 16;10(8):e039652
pubmed: 32801208
Infect Dis Model. 2020 Feb 11;5:248-255
pubmed: 32099934
Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2020 Nov;4(11):817-827
pubmed: 32758453
Euro Surveill. 2020 Jan;25(3):
pubmed: 31992387
BMJ Open. 2020 Aug 5;10(8):e039856
pubmed: 32759252
Sci Rep. 2021 Oct 20;11(1):20728
pubmed: 34671043
JAMA. 2020 Mar 17;323(11):1061-1069
pubmed: 32031570
Math Biosci Eng. 2020 Apr 8;17(4):3052-3061
pubmed: 32987516
BMJ. 2020 May 12;369:m1808
pubmed: 32398230
Nat Med. 2020 Sep;26(9):1417-1421
pubmed: 32665655
Nature. 2020 May;581(7809):465-469
pubmed: 32235945
Lancet Infect Dis. 2020 Jun;20(6):669-677
pubmed: 32240634
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020 Aug 28;69(34):1177-1179
pubmed: 32853190
N Engl J Med. 2020 May 21;382(21):2005-2011
pubmed: 32220208
PLoS One. 2020 Dec 10;15(12):e0242958
pubmed: 33301459
N Engl J Med. 2020 May 28;382(22):2081-2090
pubmed: 32329971
Nature. 2005 Sep 8;437(7056):209-14
pubmed: 16079797
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020 May 12;117(19):10484-10491
pubmed: 32327608
Ann Intern Med. 2020 May 05;172(9):577-582
pubmed: 32150748
Nurs Res. 2003 Jan-Feb;52(1):52-6
pubmed: 12552176
Lancet. 2020 Feb 15;395(10223):507-513
pubmed: 32007143

Auteurs

Le Khanh Ngan Nguyen (LKN)

Department of Management Science, Strathclyde Business School, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, United Kingdom.

Susan Howick (S)

Department of Management Science, Strathclyde Business School, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, United Kingdom.

Dennis McLafferty (D)

Adult Services, Health & Social Care North Lanarkshire, Motherwell, United Kingdom.

Gillian H Anderson (GH)

Department of Management Science, Strathclyde Business School, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, United Kingdom.

Sahaya J Pravinkumar (SJ)

Department of Public Health, NHS Lanarkshire, Kirklands Hospital, Bothwell, United Kingdom.

Robert Van Der Meer (R)

Department of Management Science, Strathclyde Business School, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, United Kingdom.

Itamar Megiddo (I)

Department of Management Science, Strathclyde Business School, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, United Kingdom.

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