Differential impact of quarantine policies for recovered COVID-19 cases in England: a case cohort study of surveillance data, June to December 2020.
COVID-19
Inequalities
Isolation
Quarantine
SARS-CoV-2
Surveillance
Journal
BMC public health
ISSN: 1471-2458
Titre abrégé: BMC Public Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968562
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 10 2022
14 10 2022
Historique:
received:
21
02
2022
accepted:
02
09
2022
revised:
24
08
2022
entrez:
14
10
2022
pubmed:
15
10
2022
medline:
19
10
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
From 12th March 2020, individuals in England were advised to quarantine in their home if a household member tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. A mandatory isolation period of 10 days was introduced on 28th September 2020 and applied to all individuals with COVID-19. We assessed the frequency, timing, and characteristics of recovered COVID-19 cases requiring subsequent quarantine episodes due to household re-exposure. In this case cohort study, all laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases notified in England (29th June to 28th December 2020) were analysed to identify consecutive household case(s). Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine associations between case characteristics and need to quarantine following recent infection (within 28 days of diagnosis). Among 1,651,550 cases resident in private dwellings and Houses of Multiple Occupancy (HMOs), 744,548 (45.1%) were the only case in their home and 56,179 (3.4%) were succeeded by further household cases diagnosed within 11-28 days of their diagnosis. Of 1,641,412 cases arising in private homes, the likelihood of further household cases was highest for Bangladeshi (aOR = 2.20, 95% CI = 2.10-2.31) and Pakistani (aOR = 2.15, 95% CI = 2.08-2.22) individuals compared to White British, as well as among young people (17-24y vs. 25-64y; aOR = 1.19, 95% CI = 1.16-1.22), men (vs. women; aOR = 1.06, 95% CI = 1.04-1.08), London residents (vs. Yorkshire and Humber; aOR = 1.57, 95% CI = 1.52-1.63) and areas of high deprivation (IMD 1 vs. 10; aOR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.09-1.19). Policies requiring quarantine on re-exposure differentially impact some of the most disadvantaged populations. Quarantine exemption for recently recovered individuals could mitigate the socioeconomic impact of responses to COVID-19 or similar infectious disease outbreaks.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
From 12th March 2020, individuals in England were advised to quarantine in their home if a household member tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. A mandatory isolation period of 10 days was introduced on 28th September 2020 and applied to all individuals with COVID-19. We assessed the frequency, timing, and characteristics of recovered COVID-19 cases requiring subsequent quarantine episodes due to household re-exposure.
METHODS
In this case cohort study, all laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases notified in England (29th June to 28th December 2020) were analysed to identify consecutive household case(s). Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine associations between case characteristics and need to quarantine following recent infection (within 28 days of diagnosis).
RESULTS
Among 1,651,550 cases resident in private dwellings and Houses of Multiple Occupancy (HMOs), 744,548 (45.1%) were the only case in their home and 56,179 (3.4%) were succeeded by further household cases diagnosed within 11-28 days of their diagnosis. Of 1,641,412 cases arising in private homes, the likelihood of further household cases was highest for Bangladeshi (aOR = 2.20, 95% CI = 2.10-2.31) and Pakistani (aOR = 2.15, 95% CI = 2.08-2.22) individuals compared to White British, as well as among young people (17-24y vs. 25-64y; aOR = 1.19, 95% CI = 1.16-1.22), men (vs. women; aOR = 1.06, 95% CI = 1.04-1.08), London residents (vs. Yorkshire and Humber; aOR = 1.57, 95% CI = 1.52-1.63) and areas of high deprivation (IMD 1 vs. 10; aOR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.09-1.19).
CONCLUSION
Policies requiring quarantine on re-exposure differentially impact some of the most disadvantaged populations. Quarantine exemption for recently recovered individuals could mitigate the socioeconomic impact of responses to COVID-19 or similar infectious disease outbreaks.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36241977
doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-14254-x
pii: 10.1186/s12889-022-14254-x
pmc: PMC9562076
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1915Informations de copyright
© 2022. Crown.
Références
SSM Popul Health. 2020 Jul 02;12:100628
pubmed: 32838017
N Engl J Med. 2021 Aug 19;385(8):759-760
pubmed: 34161702
Lancet Reg Health Eur. 2021 Mar;2:100021
pubmed: 34173624
Front Psychiatry. 2021 Feb 01;12:553468
pubmed: 33597900
J Occup Health. 2021 Jan;63(1):e12254
pubmed: 34302306
Lancet. 2021 Apr 17;397(10283):1459-1469
pubmed: 33844963
BMJ. 2021 Mar 18;372:n628
pubmed: 33737413
Int J Epidemiol. 2021 Jul 9;50(3):743-752
pubmed: 33837417
J R Soc Med. 2021 Apr;114(4):182-211
pubmed: 33759630
J Infect. 2021 Jul;83(1):e26-e28
pubmed: 33933529
BMJ. 2020 Aug 14;370:m3181
pubmed: 32816710
Int J Epidemiol. 2022 Jan 6;50(6):1804-1813
pubmed: 34999883
BMJ. 2021 May 13;373:n1088
pubmed: 33985964
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Jun 30;18(13):
pubmed: 34209105
Lancet Infect Dis. 2022 Jan;22(1):35-42
pubmed: 34461056
Public Health. 2021 May;194:163-166
pubmed: 33945929
Lancet Infect Dis. 2020 Aug;20(8):911-919
pubmed: 32353347