Background Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a rapidly emerging disease classified as a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). To support the WHO with their recommendations on quarantine, we conducted a rapid review on the effectiveness of quarantine during severe coronavirus outbreaks. Objectives To assess the effects of quarantine (alone or in combination with other measures) of individuals who had contact with confirmed or suspected cases of COVID-19, who travelled from countries with a declared outbreak, or who live in regions with high disease transmission. Search methods An information specialist searched the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, and updated the search in PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, WHO Global Index Medicus, Embase, and CINAHL on 23 June 2020. Selection criteria Cohort studies, case-control studies, time series, interrupted time series, case 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 abstracts and titles in duplicate. Two review authors then independently screened all potentially relevant full-text publications. One review author extracted data, assessed the risk of bias and assessed the certainty of evidence with GRADE and a second review author checked the assessment. We used three different tools to assess risk of bias, depending on the study design: ROBINS-I for non-randomised studies of interventions, a tool provided by Cochrane Childhood Cancer for non-randomised, non-controlled studies, and recommendations from the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) for modelling studies. We rated the certainty of evidence for the four primary outcomes: incidence, onward transmission, mortality, and costs. Main results We included 51 studies; 4 observational studies and 28 modelling studies on COVID-19, one observational and one modelling study on MERS, three observational and 11 modelling studies on SARS, and three modelling studies on SARS and other infectious diseases. Because of the diverse methods of measurement and analysis across the outcomes of interest, we could not conduct a meta-analysis and undertook a narrative synthesis. We judged risk of bias to be moderate for 2/3 non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs) and serious for 1/3 NRSI. We rated risk of bias moderate for 4/5 non-controlled cohort studies, and serious for 1/5. We rated modelling studies as having no concerns for 13 studies, moderate concerns for 17 studies and major concerns for 13 studies. Quarantine for individuals who were in contact with a confirmed/suspected COVID-19 case in comparison to no quarantine Modelling studies consistently reported a benefit of the simulated quarantine measures, for example, quarantine of people exposed to confirmed or suspected cases may have averted 44% to 96% of incident cases and 31% to 76% of deaths compared to no measures based on different scenarios (incident cases: 6 modelling studies on COVID-19, 1 on SARS; mortality: 2 modelling studies on COVID-19, 1 on SARS, low-certainty evidence). Studies also indicated that there may be a reduction in the basic reproduction number ranging from 37% to 88% due to the implementation of quarantine (5 modelling studies on COVID-19, low-certainty evidence). Very low-certainty evidence suggests that the earlier quarantine measures are implemented, the greater the cost savings may be (2 modelling studies on SARS). Quarantine in combination with other measures to contain COVID-19 in comparison to other measures without quarantine or no measures When the models combined quarantine with other prevention and control measures, such as school closures, travel restrictions and social distancing, the models demonstrated that there may be a larger effect on the reduction of new cases, transmissions and deaths than measures without quarantine or no interventions (incident cases: 9 modelling studies on COVID-19; onward transmission: 5 modelling studies on COVID-19; mortality: 5 modelling studies on COVID-19, low-certainty evidence). Studies on SARS and MERS were consistent with findings from the studies on COVID-19. Quarantine for individuals travelling from a country with a declared COVID-19 outbreak compared to no quarantine Very low-certainty evidence indicated that the effect of quarantine of travellers from a country with a declared outbreak on reducing incidence and deaths may be small for SARS, but might be larger for COVID-19 (2 observational studies on COVID-19 and 2 observational studies on SARS). Authors' conclusions The current evidence is limited because most studies on COVID-19 are mathematical modelling studies that make different assumptions on important model parameters. Findings consistently indicate that quarantine is important in reducing incidence and mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic, although there is uncertainty over the magnitude of the effect. 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 and the impact of the measures implemented. This review was originally commissioned by the WHO and supported by Danube-University-Krems. The update was self-initiated by the review authors.

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

https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2926&context=ndlr

Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties

Fragmented health systems in COVID-19: rectifying the misalignment between global health security and universal health coverage.

Taking the right measures to control COVID-19.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has spread over 210 countries and territories beyond China shortly. On February 29, 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) denoted it in a high-risk category, and on March 11, 2020, this virus was designated pandemic, after its declaration being a Public Health International Emergency on January 30, 2020. World over high efforts are being made to counter and contain this virus. The COVID-19 outbreak once again proves the potential of the animal-human interface to act as the primary source of emerging zoonotic diseases. Even though the circumstantial evidence suggests the possibility of an initial zoonotic emergence, it is too early to confirm the role of intermediate hosts such as snakes, pangolins, turtles, and other wild animals in the origin of SARS-CoV-2, in addition to bats, the natural hosts of multiple coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV. The lessons learned from past episodes of MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV are being exploited to retort this virus. Best efforts are being taken up by worldwide nations to implement effective diagnosis, strict vigilance, heightened surveillance, and monitoring, along with adopting appropriate preventive and control strategies. Identifying the possible zoonotic emergence and the exact mechanism responsible for its initial transmission will help us to design and implement appropriate preventive barriers against the further transmission of SARS-CoV-2. This review discusses in brief about the COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2 with a particular focus on the role of animals, the veterinary and associated zoonotic links along with prevention and control strategies based on One-health approaches.

COVID-19: animals, veterinary and zoonotic links.


Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to present findings from a mixed-methods study on the impact that COVID-19 has had on adult safeguarding. The research sought to explore the challenges and opportunities presented by COVID-19 to both frontline and non-frontline professionals working in adult safeguarding.


Design/methodology/approach
A mixed-methods project was undertaken comprising a literature review, survey, semi-structured interviews and a small number of freedom of information requests. This paper presents the findings predominantly from the survey and interviews.


Findings
Unsurprisingly, COVID-19 has presented a variety of challenges for professionals working in adult safeguarding. The themes that occurred most often were the day-to-day changes and challenges, relationships across sectors, information and navigating the ethical questions in safeguarding.


Originality/value
To the best of the authors’ knowledge, the findings represent the first focused qualitative mixed-method study aimed at understanding more about the impact the pandemic has had on adult safeguarding through the eyes of those professionals working in that field.


/pdf/exploring-the-changes-and-challenges-of-covid-19-in-adult-c4scjcfa.pdf

Exploring the changes and challenges of COVID-19 in adult safeguarding practice: qualitative findings from a mixed-methods project

Description Negotiations ought not focus on enforcement and sanctions Member states of the World Health Organization (WHO) are undertaking ambitious governance reforms to prevent, prepare for, and respond to pandemics by concurrently negotiating both a new international legal instrument (henceforth called “the Pandemic Treaty”) and amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR). We therefore find ourselves at a critical juncture in global health governance, with the opportunity to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response through international law. One issue being given considerable prominence in each of these negotiations is how compliance by member states with their obligations can best be achieved. We argue that any efforts to ensure compliance with these instruments should be seen as part of broader efforts to ensure effective and equitable implementation, as opposed to being overly focused on formal compliance mechanisms and the possibility of punitive action in response to noncompliance.

Mark Eccleston-Turner

Papers

Exploring the changes and challenges of COVID-19 in adult safeguarding practice: qualitative findings from a mixed-methods project

Implementation, compliance, and pandemic legal obligations