Dissection of non-pharmaceutical interventions implemented by Iran, South Korea, and Turkey in the fight against COVID-19 pandemic.
14 Sep 2021-Journal of diabetes and metabolic disorders (Springer International Publishing)-Vol. 20, Iss: 2, pp 1-13
TL;DR: In this paper, the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) and compared the strategies implemented by Iran, Turkey, and South Korea to mitigate the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Abstract: The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has imposed a great global burden on public health. As one of the most affected countries, Iran has tackled emerging challenges in the path to overcoming the epidemic, with three peaks of the disease propagation as of February 19, 2020. To flatten the curve of the COVID-19 pandemic, most countries have implemented bundles of intrusive, sometimes extremely stringent non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). In this communication, we have dissected the effectiveness of NPIs and compared the strategies implemented by Iran, Turkey, and South Korea to mitigate the disease’s spread. We searched online databases via PubMed, Web of Knowledge, and Scopus. Titles/abstracts and full-texts were screened by two reviewers and discrepancies were resolved upon discussion. Our results provide insights into five domains: prevention, screening, in-patient and out-patient facilities, governance, and management of diabetes mellitus. Analysis of previous efforts put in place illustrates that by fostering efficient social distancing measures, increasing the capability to perform prompt polymerase chain reaction tests, applying smart contact tracing, and supplying adequate personal protective equipment, Turkey and South Korea have brought the epidemic sub-optimally under control. From the perspective of policymakers, these achievements are of utmost importance given that attaining the aspirational goals in the management of the COVID-19 necessities a suitable adjustment of previous successful strategies. Hence, policymakers should be noticed that a suitable combination of NPIs is necessary to stem the disease’s propagation.
Citations
More filters
References
More filters
TL;DR: Characteristics of patients who died were in line with the MuLBSTA score, an early warning model for predicting mortality in viral pneumonia, and further investigation is needed to explore the applicability of the Mu LBSTA scores in predicting the risk of mortality in 2019-nCoV infection.
16,282 citations
TL;DR: Just under half a billion people are living with diabetes worldwide and the number is projected to increase by 25% in 2030 and 51% in 2045, with the prevalence higher in urban than rural areas, and in high-income than low-income countries.
4,865 citations
TL;DR: The results suggest that early detection, hand washing, self-isolation, and household quarantine will likely be more effective than travel restrictions at mitigating this pandemic, and sustained 90% travel restrictions to and from mainland China only modestly affect the epidemic trajectory unless combined with a 50% or higher reduction of transmission in the community.
Abstract: Motivated by the rapid spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in mainland China, we use a global metapopulation disease transmission model to project the impact of travel limitations on the national and international spread of the epidemic. The model is calibrated on the basis of internationally reported cases and shows that, at the start of the travel ban from Wuhan on 23 January 2020, most Chinese cities had already received many infected travelers. The travel quarantine of Wuhan delayed the overall epidemic progression by only 3 to 5 days in mainland China but had a more marked effect on the international scale, where case importations were reduced by nearly 80% until mid-February. Modeling results also indicate that sustained 90% travel restrictions to and from mainland China only modestly affect the epidemic trajectory unless combined with a 50% or higher reduction of transmission in the community.
2,949 citations
TL;DR: The results show that major non-pharmaceutical interventions and lockdown in particular have had a large effect on reducing transmission and continued intervention should be considered to keep transmission of SARS-CoV-2 under control.
Abstract: Following the detection of the new coronavirus1 severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and its spread outside of China, Europe has experienced large epidemics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In response, many European countries have implemented non-pharmaceutical interventions, such as the closure of schools and national lockdowns. Here we study the effect of major interventions across 11 European countries for the period from the start of the COVID-19 epidemics in February 2020 until 4 May 2020, when lockdowns started to be lifted. Our model calculates backwards from observed deaths to estimate transmission that occurred several weeks previously, allowing for the time lag between infection and death. We use partial pooling of information between countries, with both individual and shared effects on the time-varying reproduction number (Rt). Pooling allows for more information to be used, helps to overcome idiosyncrasies in the data and enables more-timely estimates. Our model relies on fixed estimates of some epidemiological parameters (such as the infection fatality rate), does not include importation or subnational variation and assumes that changes in Rt are an immediate response to interventions rather than gradual changes in behaviour. Amidst the ongoing pandemic, we rely on death data that are incomplete, show systematic biases in reporting and are subject to future consolidation. We estimate that-for all of the countries we consider here-current interventions have been sufficient to drive Rt below 1 (probability Rt < 1.0 is greater than 99%) and achieve control of the epidemic. We estimate that across all 11 countries combined, between 12 and 15 million individuals were infected with SARS-CoV-2 up to 4 May 2020, representing between 3.2% and 4.0% of the population. Our results show that major non-pharmaceutical interventions-and lockdowns in particular-have had a large effect on reducing transmission. Continued intervention should be considered to keep transmission of SARS-CoV-2 under control.
2,568 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the effects of physical distancing measures on the progression of the COVID-19 epidemic in Wuhan, China were investigated using synthetic location-specific contact patterns.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: In December, 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), a novel coronavirus, emerged in Wuhan, China. Since then, the city of Wuhan has taken unprecedented measures in response to the outbreak, including extended school and workplace closures. We aimed to estimate the effects of physical distancing measures on the progression of the COVID-19 epidemic, hoping to provide some insights for the rest of the world. METHODS: To examine how changes in population mixing have affected outbreak progression in Wuhan, we used synthetic location-specific contact patterns in Wuhan and adapted these in the presence of school closures, extended workplace closures, and a reduction in mixing in the general community. Using these matrices and the latest estimates of the epidemiological parameters of the Wuhan outbreak, we simulated the ongoing trajectory of an outbreak in Wuhan using an age-structured susceptible-exposed-infected-removed (SEIR) model for several physical distancing measures. We fitted the latest estimates of epidemic parameters from a transmission model to data on local and internationally exported cases from Wuhan in an age-structured epidemic framework and investigated the age distribution of cases. We also simulated lifting of the control measures by allowing people to return to work in a phased-in way and looked at the effects of returning to work at different stages of the underlying outbreak (at the beginning of March or April). FINDINGS: Our projections show that physical distancing measures were most effective if the staggered return to work was at the beginning of April; this reduced the median number of infections by more than 92% (IQR 66-97) and 24% (13-90) in mid-2020 and end-2020, respectively. There are benefits to sustaining these measures until April in terms of delaying and reducing the height of the peak, median epidemic size at end-2020, and affording health-care systems more time to expand and respond. However, the modelled effects of physical distancing measures vary by the duration of infectiousness and the role school children have in the epidemic. INTERPRETATION: Restrictions on activities in Wuhan, if maintained until April, would probably help to delay the epidemic peak. Our projections suggest that premature and sudden lifting of interventions could lead to an earlier secondary peak, which could be flattened by relaxing the interventions gradually. However, there are limitations to our analysis, including large uncertainties around estimates of R0 and the duration of infectiousness. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, National Institute for Health Research, Wellcome Trust, and Health Data Research UK.
1,775 citations