Evaluating the direct effect of vaccination and non-pharmaceutical interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe.
Journal
Communications medicine
ISSN: 2730-664X
Titre abrégé: Commun Med (Lond)
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9918250414506676
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 Sep 2024
11 Sep 2024
Historique:
received:
15
11
2023
accepted:
29
08
2024
medline:
12
9
2024
pubmed:
12
9
2024
entrez:
11
9
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Across Europe, countries have responded to the COVID-19 pandemic with a combination of non-pharmaceutical interventions and vaccination. Evaluating the effectiveness of such interventions is of particular relevance to policy-makers. We leverage almost three years of available data across 38 European countries to evaluate the effectiveness of governmental responses in controlling the pandemic. We developed a Bayesian hierarchical model that flexibly relates daily COVID-19 incidence to past levels of vaccination and non-pharmaceutical interventions as summarised in the Stringency Index. Specifically, we use a distributed lag approach to temporally weight past intervention values, a tensor-product smooth to capture non-linearities and interactions between both types of interventions, and a hierarchical approach to parsimoniously address heterogeneity across countries. We identify a pronounced negative association between daily incidence and the strength of non-pharmaceutical interventions, along with substantial heterogeneity in effectiveness among European countries. Similarly, we observe a strong but more consistent negative association with vaccination levels. Our results show that non-linear interactions shape the effectiveness of interventions, with non-pharmaceutical interventions becoming less effective under high vaccination levels. Finally, our results indicate that the effects of interventions on daily incidence are most pronounced at a lag of 14 days after being in place. Our Bayesian hierarchical modelling approach reveals clear negative and lagged effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions and vaccination on confirmed COVID-19 cases across European countries. As soon as COVID-19 hit Europe in early 2020, non-pharmaceutical interventions such as movement restrictions and social distancing were employed to contain the pandemic. Towards the end of 2020, vaccination was available and promoted as an additional defence. We analysed almost three years of public COVID-19 data to determine how effective both types of strategies were in containing the pandemic across 38 European countries. We developed a statistical model to relate confirmed cases to how strict non-pharmaceutical interventions were and to vaccination levels. Both non-pharmaceutical interventions and vaccination resulted in decreased confirmed cases, although variation exists among countries. When an intervention is applied, the effect on number of confirmed cases could be seen most about fourteen days after implementation.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Across Europe, countries have responded to the COVID-19 pandemic with a combination of non-pharmaceutical interventions and vaccination. Evaluating the effectiveness of such interventions is of particular relevance to policy-makers.
METHODS
METHODS
We leverage almost three years of available data across 38 European countries to evaluate the effectiveness of governmental responses in controlling the pandemic. We developed a Bayesian hierarchical model that flexibly relates daily COVID-19 incidence to past levels of vaccination and non-pharmaceutical interventions as summarised in the Stringency Index. Specifically, we use a distributed lag approach to temporally weight past intervention values, a tensor-product smooth to capture non-linearities and interactions between both types of interventions, and a hierarchical approach to parsimoniously address heterogeneity across countries.
RESULTS
RESULTS
We identify a pronounced negative association between daily incidence and the strength of non-pharmaceutical interventions, along with substantial heterogeneity in effectiveness among European countries. Similarly, we observe a strong but more consistent negative association with vaccination levels. Our results show that non-linear interactions shape the effectiveness of interventions, with non-pharmaceutical interventions becoming less effective under high vaccination levels. Finally, our results indicate that the effects of interventions on daily incidence are most pronounced at a lag of 14 days after being in place.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our Bayesian hierarchical modelling approach reveals clear negative and lagged effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions and vaccination on confirmed COVID-19 cases across European countries.
As soon as COVID-19 hit Europe in early 2020, non-pharmaceutical interventions such as movement restrictions and social distancing were employed to contain the pandemic. Towards the end of 2020, vaccination was available and promoted as an additional defence. We analysed almost three years of public COVID-19 data to determine how effective both types of strategies were in containing the pandemic across 38 European countries. We developed a statistical model to relate confirmed cases to how strict non-pharmaceutical interventions were and to vaccination levels. Both non-pharmaceutical interventions and vaccination resulted in decreased confirmed cases, although variation exists among countries. When an intervention is applied, the effect on number of confirmed cases could be seen most about fourteen days after implementation.
Autres résumés
Type: plain-language-summary
(eng)
As soon as COVID-19 hit Europe in early 2020, non-pharmaceutical interventions such as movement restrictions and social distancing were employed to contain the pandemic. Towards the end of 2020, vaccination was available and promoted as an additional defence. We analysed almost three years of public COVID-19 data to determine how effective both types of strategies were in containing the pandemic across 38 European countries. We developed a statistical model to relate confirmed cases to how strict non-pharmaceutical interventions were and to vaccination levels. Both non-pharmaceutical interventions and vaccination resulted in decreased confirmed cases, although variation exists among countries. When an intervention is applied, the effect on number of confirmed cases could be seen most about fourteen days after implementation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39261675
doi: 10.1038/s43856-024-00600-0
pii: 10.1038/s43856-024-00600-0
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
178Subventions
Organisme : Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (Research Foundation Flanders)
ID : 11E3222N
Organisme : EC | Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation H2020)
ID : 101003688
Organisme : EC | Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation H2020)
ID : 101003688
Organisme : Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (Research Foundation Flanders)
ID : G0A4121N
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Hens, N., Vranck, P. & Molenberghs, G. The COVID-19 epidemic, its mortality, and the role of non-pharmaceutical interventions. Eur. Heart J. Acute Cardiovasc. Care 9, 204–208 (2020).
pubmed: 32352314
doi: 10.1177/2048872620924922
Ferguson, N. et al. Report 9: Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to reduce COVID-19 mortality and healthcare demand (Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team, 2020).
Mathieu, E. et al. A global database of COVID-19 vaccinations. Nat. Hum. Behav. 5, 947–953 (2021).
pubmed: 33972767
doi: 10.1038/s41562-021-01122-8
Hale, T. et al. A global panel database of pandemic policies (Oxford COVID-19 government response tracker). Nat. Hum. Behav. 5, 529–538 (2021).
pubmed: 33686204
doi: 10.1038/s41562-021-01079-8
Flaxman, S. et al. Estimating the effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 in Europe. Nature 584, 257–261 (2020).
pubmed: 32512579
doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2405-7
Banholzer, N. et al. The methodologies to assess the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions during COVID-19: a systematic review. Eur. J. Epidemiol. 37, 1003–1024 (2022).
pubmed: 36152133
pmcid: 9510554
doi: 10.1007/s10654-022-00908-y
Perra, N. Non-pharmaceutical interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic: a review. Phys. Rep. 913, 1–52 (2021).
pubmed: 33612922
pmcid: 7881715
doi: 10.1016/j.physrep.2021.02.001
Talic, S. et al. Effectiveness of public health measures in reducing the incidence of COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2 transmission, and COVID-19 mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 375, e068302 (2021).
Mendez-Brito, A., Bcheraoui, C. E. & Pozo-Martin, F. Systematic review of empirical studies comparing the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions against COVID-19. J. Infect. 83, 281–293 (2021).
pubmed: 34161818
pmcid: 8214911
doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2021.06.018
Eikenberry, S. E. et al. To mask or not to mask: modeling the potential for face mask use by the general public to curtail the COVID-19 pandemic. Infect. Dis. Model. 5, 293–308 (2020).
pubmed: 32355904
pmcid: 7186508
Mendes, J. M. & Coelho, P. S. The effect of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 outcomes: a heterogeneous age-related generalisation of the SEIR model. Infect. Dis. Model. 8, 742–768 (2023).
pubmed: 37366483
pmcid: 10287188
Santos, J. V. et al. Factors associated with non-pharmaceutical interventions compliance during COVID-19 pandemic: a Portuguese cross-sectional survey. J. Public Health 45, 47–56 (2023).
doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdac001
Neyens, T. et al. Can COVID-19 symptoms as reported in a large-scale online survey be used to optimise spatial predictions of COVID-19 incidence risk in Belgium? Spat. Spatiotemporal Epidemiol. 35, 100379 (2020).
pubmed: 33138946
pmcid: 7518805
doi: 10.1016/j.sste.2020.100379
Downing, S. T., Mccarty, R. J., Guastello, A. D., Cooke, D. L. & Mcnamara, J. P. Assessing the predictors of adaptive and maladaptive COVID-19 preventive behaviours: an application of protection motivation theory. Psychol., Health Med. 28, 460–474 (2023).
pubmed: 35769017
doi: 10.1080/13548506.2022.2093925
Brauner, J. M. et al. Inferring the effectiveness of government interventions against COVID-19. Science 371, eabd9338 (2021).
pubmed: 33323424
doi: 10.1126/science.abd9338
Liu, Y. et al. The impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions on SARS-CoV-2 transmission across 130 countries and territories. BMC Med. 19, 1–12 (2021).
doi: 10.1186/s12916-020-01872-8
Ge, Y. et al. Impacts of worldwide individual non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 transmission across waves and space. Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf. 106, 102649 (2022).
pubmed: 35110979
pmcid: 8666325
Haug, N. et al. Ranking the effectiveness of worldwide COVID-19 government interventions. Nat. Hum. Behav. 4, 1303–1312 (2020).
pubmed: 33199859
doi: 10.1038/s41562-020-01009-0
Sharma, M. et al. Understanding the effectiveness of government interventions against the resurgence of COVID-19 in Europe. Nat. Commun. 12, 5820 (2021).
pubmed: 34611158
pmcid: 8492703
doi: 10.1038/s41467-021-26013-4
Campbell, F. et al. Increased transmissibility and global spread of SARSCoV-2 variants of concern as at June 2021. Eurosurveillance 26, 1–6 (2021).
doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2021.26.24.2100509
Gozzi, N., Bajardi, P. & Perra, N. The importance of non-pharmaceutical interventions during the COVID-19 vaccine rollout. PLOS Comput. Biol. 17, e1009346 (2021).
pubmed: 34506478
pmcid: 8457458
doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009346
Ge, Y. et al. Untangling the changing impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions and vaccination on European COVID-19 trajectories. Nat. Commun. 13, 3106 (2022).
pubmed: 35661759
pmcid: 9166696
doi: 10.1038/s41467-022-30897-1
Lionello, L. et al. Non-pharmaceutical interventions in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in 30 European countries: the ECDC–JRC response measures database. Eurosurveillance 27, 2101190 (2022).
pubmed: 36239171
pmcid: 9562809
doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2022.27.41.2101190
Polack, F. P. et al. Safety and efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. N. Engl. J. Med. 383, 2603–2615 (2020).
pubmed: 33301246
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2034577
Moghadas, S. M. et al. Evaluation of COVID-19 vaccination strategies with a delayed second dose. PLOS Biol. 19, 1–13 (2021).
doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3001211
Almon, S. The distributed lag between capital appropriations and expenditures. Econometrica 33, 178–196 (1965).
doi: 10.2307/1911894
Schwartz, J. The distributed lag between air pollution and daily deaths. Epidemiology 11, 320–326 (2000).
pubmed: 10784251
doi: 10.1097/00001648-200005000-00016
Nottmeyer, L. et al. The association of COVID-19 incidence with temperature, humidity, and UV radiation—a global multi-city analysis. Sci. Total Environ. 854, 158636 (2023).
pubmed: 36087670
doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.158636
Rasmussen, C. E. & Williams, C. K. I. Gaussian processes for machine learning (MIT Press, 2006).
Heaton, M. J. & Peng, R. D. Flexible distributed lag models using random functions with application to estimating mortality displacement from heat-related deaths. J. Agric. Biol., Environ. Stat. 17, 313–331 (2012).
pubmed: 23125520
doi: 10.1007/s13253-012-0097-7
Abrahamsen, P. A Review of Gaussian Random Fields and Correlation Functions (Norsk Regnesentral/Norwegian Computing Center, 1997).
Monod, M. et al. Regularised B-splines projected Gaussian process priors to estimate time-trends in age-specific COVID-19 deaths. Bayesian Anal. 18, 957 – 987 (2023).
doi: 10.1214/22-BA1334
Lewandowski, D., Kurowicka, D. & Joe, H. Generating random correlation matrices based on vines and extended onion method. J. Multivar. Anal. 100, 1989–2001 (2009).
doi: 10.1016/j.jmva.2009.04.008
Gabry, J. & Češnovar, R. cmdstanr: R interface to ’cmdstan’ (2022).
Team, R. C. R: A language and environment for statistical computing https://www.R-project.org/ (2022).
Carpenter, B. et al. Stan: a probabilistic programming language. J. Stat. Softw., Artic. 76, 1–32 (2017).
Kay, M. Tidybayes: Tidy Data and Geoms for Bayesian Models http://mjskay.github.io/tidybayes/ (2022).
Vehtari, A., Gelman, A., Simpson, D., Carpenter, B. & Burkner, P. C. Rank-normalization, folding, and localization: An improved R-hat for assessing convergence of MCMC (with discussion). Bayesian Anal. 16, 667–718 (2021).
doi: 10.1214/20-BA1221
Fajgenblat, M. et al. Code for: Evaluating the direct effect of vaccination and non-pharmaceutical interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13292978 (2024).
Du, Z. et al. Pandemic fatigue impedes mitigation of COVID-19 in Hong Kong. in Proc. of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 119, (2022).
Petherick, A. et al. A worldwide assessment of changes in adherence to COVID-19 protective behaviours and hypothesized pandemic fatigue. Nat. Hum. Behav. 5, 1145–1160 (2021).
pubmed: 34345009
doi: 10.1038/s41562-021-01181-x
Yan, Y. et al. Measuring voluntary and policy-induced social distancing behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic. in Proc. of the National Academy of Sciences, (2021).
Fontanet, A. & Cauchemez, S. COVID-19 herd immunity: where are we? Nat. Rev. Immunol. 20, 583–584 (2020).
pubmed: 32908300
pmcid: 7480627
doi: 10.1038/s41577-020-00451-5
Andrews, N. et al. COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness against the Omicron (B.1.1.529) variant. N. Engl. J. Med. 386, 1532–1546 (2022).
pubmed: 35249272
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2119451
Viana, R. et al. Rapid epidemic expansion of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant in southern Africa. Nature 603, 679+ (2022).
pubmed: 35042229
pmcid: 8942855
doi: 10.1038/s41586-022-04411-y
Andersson, N. W. et al. Comparative effectiveness of bivalent BA.4-5 and BA.1 mRNA booster vaccines among adults aged less than 50 years in Nordic countries: nationwide cohort study. BMJ 382, e075286 (2023).
Matrajt, L., Eaton, J., Leung, T. & Brown, E. R. Vaccine optimization for COVID-19: Who to vaccinate first? Sci. Adv. 7, eabf1374 (2021).
pubmed: 33536223
pmcid: 8128110
doi: 10.1126/sciadv.abf1374
Lau, H. et al. Evaluating the massive underreporting and undertesting of COVID-19 cases in multiple global epicenters. Pulmonology 27, 110–115 (2021).
pubmed: 32540223
doi: 10.1016/j.pulmoe.2020.05.015
Albani, V., Loria, J., Massad, E. & Zubelli, J. COVID-19 underreporting and its impact on vaccination strategies. BMC Infect. Dis. 21, 1–13 (2021).
doi: 10.1186/s12879-021-06780-7
Mathieu, E. et al. Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19). Our World in Data https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus (2020).
Kirpich, A. et al. Excess mortality in Belarus during the COVID-19 pandemic as the case study of a country with limited non-pharmaceutical interventions and limited reporting. Sci. Rep. 12, 5475 (2022).
pubmed: 35361826
pmcid: 8970068
doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-09345-z
Tao, K. et al. The biological and clinical significance of emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants. Nat. Rev. Genet. 22, 757–773 (2021).
pubmed: 34535792
pmcid: 8447121
doi: 10.1038/s41576-021-00408-x
Harvey, W. T. et al. SARS-CoV-2 variants, spike mutations and immune escape. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 19, 409–424 (2021).
pubmed: 34075212
pmcid: 8167834
doi: 10.1038/s41579-021-00573-0
Davies, N. G. et al. Estimated transmissibility and impact of SARS-CoV-2 lineage B.1.1.7 in England. Science 372, eabg3055 (2021).
pubmed: 33658326
pmcid: 8128288
doi: 10.1126/science.abg3055
Feikin, D. R. et al. Duration of effectiveness of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 disease: results of a systematic review and meta-regression. Lancet 399, 924–944 (2022).
pubmed: 35202601
pmcid: 8863502
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(22)00152-0
Levin, E. G. et al. Waning immune humoral response to BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine over 6 months. N. Engl. J. Med. 385, e84 (2021).
pubmed: 34614326
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa2114583