Factors shaping the COVID-19 epidemic curve: a multi-country analysis.
COVID-19
Coronavirus disease 2019
Human mobility
Lockdown
SARS-CoV-2
Segemented Time-series
Stringency index
Journal
BMC infectious diseases
ISSN: 1471-2334
Titre abrégé: BMC Infect Dis
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968551
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 Oct 2021
02 Oct 2021
Historique:
received:
22
10
2020
accepted:
22
09
2021
entrez:
3
10
2021
pubmed:
4
10
2021
medline:
6
10
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Lockdown measures are the backbone of containment measures for the COVID-19 pandemic both in high-income countries (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, in view of the inevitably-occurring second and third global covid-19 wave, assessing the success and impact of containment measures on the epidemic curve of COVID-19 and people's compliance with such measures is crucial for more effective policies. To determine the containment measures influencing the COVID-19 epidemic curve in nine targeted countries across high-, middle-, and low-income nations. Four HICs (Germany, Sweden, Italy, and South Korea) and five LMICs (Mexico, Colombia, India, Nigeria, and Nepal) were selected to assess the association using interrupted time series analysis of daily case numbers and deaths of COVID-19 considering the following factors: The "stringency index (SI)" indicating how tight the containment measures were implemented in each country; and the level of compliance with the prescribed measures using human mobility data. Additionally, a scoping review was conducted to contextualize the findings. Most countries implemented quite rigorous lockdown measures, particularly the LMICs (India, Nepal, and Colombia) following the model of HICs (Germany and Italy). Exceptions were Sweden and South Korea, which opted for different strategies. The compliance with the restrictions-measured as mobility related to home office, restraining from leisure activities, non-use of local transport and others-was generally good, except in Sweden and South Korea where the restrictions were limited. The endemic curves and time-series analysis showed that the containment measures were successful in HICs but not in LMICs. The imposed lockdown measures are alarming, particularly in resource-constrained settings where such measures are independent of the population segment, which drives the virus transmission. Methods for examining people's movements or hardships that are caused by covid- no work, no food situation are inequitable. Novel and context-adapted approach of dealing with the COVID-19 crisis are therefore crucial.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Lockdown measures are the backbone of containment measures for the COVID-19 pandemic both in high-income countries (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, in view of the inevitably-occurring second and third global covid-19 wave, assessing the success and impact of containment measures on the epidemic curve of COVID-19 and people's compliance with such measures is crucial for more effective policies. To determine the containment measures influencing the COVID-19 epidemic curve in nine targeted countries across high-, middle-, and low-income nations.
METHODS
METHODS
Four HICs (Germany, Sweden, Italy, and South Korea) and five LMICs (Mexico, Colombia, India, Nigeria, and Nepal) were selected to assess the association using interrupted time series analysis of daily case numbers and deaths of COVID-19 considering the following factors: The "stringency index (SI)" indicating how tight the containment measures were implemented in each country; and the level of compliance with the prescribed measures using human mobility data. Additionally, a scoping review was conducted to contextualize the findings.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Most countries implemented quite rigorous lockdown measures, particularly the LMICs (India, Nepal, and Colombia) following the model of HICs (Germany and Italy). Exceptions were Sweden and South Korea, which opted for different strategies. The compliance with the restrictions-measured as mobility related to home office, restraining from leisure activities, non-use of local transport and others-was generally good, except in Sweden and South Korea where the restrictions were limited. The endemic curves and time-series analysis showed that the containment measures were successful in HICs but not in LMICs.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The imposed lockdown measures are alarming, particularly in resource-constrained settings where such measures are independent of the population segment, which drives the virus transmission. Methods for examining people's movements or hardships that are caused by covid- no work, no food situation are inequitable. Novel and context-adapted approach of dealing with the COVID-19 crisis are therefore crucial.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34600485
doi: 10.1186/s12879-021-06714-3
pii: 10.1186/s12879-021-06714-3
pmc: PMC8487341
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1032Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Glob Health J. 2021 Mar;5(1):56-61
pubmed: 33585052
Science. 2021 Feb 19;371(6531):
pubmed: 33323424
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097
pubmed: 19621072
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2020 May 7;6(2):e19368
pubmed: 32365045
Euro Surveill. 2020 Apr;25(17):
pubmed: 32372753
Epidemiol Health. 2020;42:e2020011
pubmed: 32164053
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2020 Oct;74(10):858-860
pubmed: 32366584
Epidemiol Health. 2020;42:e2020026
pubmed: 32375455
PLoS One. 2021 Feb 1;16(2):e0245886
pubmed: 33524042
Cad Saude Publica. 2020 Apr 30;36(4):e00074420
pubmed: 32374808
Int J Infect Dis. 2020 Apr;93:339-344
pubmed: 32198088
Nat Med. 2020 Dec;26(12):1829-1834
pubmed: 33020651
Osong Public Health Res Perspect. 2020 Apr;11(2):85-90
pubmed: 32257774
Eur J Epidemiol. 2020 Apr;35(4):341-345
pubmed: 32306149
Int J Epidemiol. 2017 Feb 1;46(1):348-355
pubmed: 27283160
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Apr 8;4:CD013574
pubmed: 32267544
Lancet. 2020 Apr 25;395(10233):1315
pubmed: 32334687
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2020 Apr 24;6(2):e19218
pubmed: 32301734
Indian J Med Res. 2020 Feb & Mar;151(2 & 3):190-199
pubmed: 32362645
Saf Sci. 2020 Aug;128:104773
pubmed: 32296266
Sci Total Environ. 2020 Aug 1;728:138762
pubmed: 32334157
Chaos. 2020 Apr;30(4):041102
pubmed: 32357675
Sci Total Environ. 2020 Jul 10;725:138539
pubmed: 32304973
Braz Oral Res. 2020 Jun 24;34:e068
pubmed: 32609235
PLoS One. 2020 Sep 16;15(9):e0239026
pubmed: 32936811
Euro Surveill. 2020 Apr;25(13):
pubmed: 32265005
Acta Biomed. 2020 Apr 10;91(3-S):175-179
pubmed: 32275287