Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
PLoS One ; 16(7): e0254456, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1309962

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Vaccination programs aim to control the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the relative impacts of vaccine coverage, effectiveness, and capacity in the context of nonpharmaceutical interventions such as mask use and physical distancing on the spread of SARS-CoV-2 are unclear. Our objective was to examine the impact of vaccination on the control of SARS-CoV-2 using our previously developed agent-based simulation model. METHODS: We applied our agent-based model to replicate COVID-19-related events in 1) Dane County, Wisconsin; 2) Milwaukee metropolitan area, Wisconsin; 3) New York City (NYC). We evaluated the impact of vaccination considering the proportion of the population vaccinated, probability that a vaccinated individual gains immunity, vaccination capacity, and adherence to nonpharmaceutical interventions. We estimated the timing of pandemic control, defined as the date after which only a small number of new cases occur. RESULTS: The timing of pandemic control depends highly on vaccination coverage, effectiveness, and adherence to nonpharmaceutical interventions. In Dane County and Milwaukee, if 50% of the population is vaccinated with a daily vaccination capacity of 0.25% of the population, vaccine effectiveness of 90%, and the adherence to nonpharmaceutical interventions is 60%, controlled spread could be achieved by June 2021 versus October 2021 in Dane County and November 2021 in Milwaukee without vaccine. DISCUSSION: In controlling the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the impact of vaccination varies widely depending not only on effectiveness and coverage, but also concurrent adherence to nonpharmaceutical interventions.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , COVID-19/prevention & control , Patient Compliance/statistics & numerical data , Vaccination Coverage/statistics & numerical data , Computer Simulation , Humans , Masks , Physical Distancing , Respiratory Protective Devices/statistics & numerical data , United States , Urban Health
2.
J Natl Cancer Inst ; 113(11): 1484-1494, 2021 11 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1309611

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has disrupted breast cancer control through short-term declines in screening and delays in diagnosis and treatments. We projected the impact of COVID-19 on future breast cancer mortality between 2020 and 2030. METHODS: Three established Cancer Intervention and Surveillance Modeling Network breast cancer models modeled reductions in mammography screening use, delays in symptomatic cancer diagnosis, and reduced use of chemotherapy for women with early-stage disease for the first 6 months of the pandemic with return to prepandemic patterns after that time. Sensitivity analyses were performed to determine the effect of key model parameters, including the duration of the pandemic impact. RESULTS: By 2030, the models project 950 (model range = 860-1297) cumulative excess breast cancer deaths related to reduced screening, 1314 (model range = 266-1325) associated with delayed diagnosis of symptomatic cases, and 151 (model range = 146-207) associated with reduced chemotherapy use in women with hormone positive, early-stage cancer. Jointly, 2487 (model range = 1713-2575) excess breast cancer deaths were estimated, representing a 0.52% (model range = 0.36%-0.56%) cumulative increase over breast cancer deaths expected by 2030 in the absence of the pandemic's disruptions. Sensitivity analyses indicated that the breast cancer mortality impact would be approximately double if the modeled pandemic effects on screening, symptomatic diagnosis, and chemotherapy extended for 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Initial pandemic-related disruptions in breast cancer care will have a small long-term cumulative impact on breast cancer mortality. Continued efforts to ensure prompt return to screening and minimize delays in evaluation of symptomatic women can largely mitigate the effects of the initial pandemic-associated disruptions.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/mortality , COVID-19/complications , Computer Simulation , Early Detection of Cancer/statistics & numerical data , Mammography/statistics & numerical data , SARS-CoV-2/isolation & purification , Time-to-Treatment/statistics & numerical data , Aged , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/therapy , Breast Neoplasms/virology , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19/virology , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Survival Rate
3.
Ann Intern Med ; 174(1): 50-57, 2021 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1067967

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Across the United States, various social distancing measures were implemented to control the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the effectiveness of such measures for specific regions with varying population demographic characteristics and different levels of adherence to social distancing is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of social distancing measures in unique regions. DESIGN: An agent-based simulation model. SETTING: Agent-based model applied to Dane County, Wisconsin; the Milwaukee metropolitan (metro) area; and New York City (NYC). PATIENTS: Synthetic population at different ages. INTERVENTION: Different times for implementing and easing social distancing measures at different levels of adherence. MEASUREMENTS: The model represented the social network and interactions among persons in a region, considering population demographic characteristics, limited testing availability, "imported" infections, asymptomatic disease transmission, and age-specific adherence to social distancing measures. The primary outcome was the total number of confirmed COVID-19 cases. RESULTS: The timing of and adherence to social distancing had a major effect on COVID-19 occurrence. In NYC, implementing social distancing measures 1 week earlier would have reduced the total number of confirmed cases from 203 261 to 41 366 as of 31 May 2020, whereas a 1-week delay could have increased the number of confirmed cases to 1 407 600. A delay in implementation had a differential effect on the number of cases in the Milwaukee metro area versus Dane County, indicating that the effect of social distancing measures varies even within the same state. LIMITATION: The effect of weather conditions on transmission dynamics was not considered. CONCLUSION: The timing of implementing and easing social distancing measures has major effects on the number of COVID-19 cases. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Cooperative Behavior , Physical Distancing , COVID-19/epidemiology , Computer Simulation , Humans , New York City/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology , Wisconsin/epidemiology
4.
medRxiv ; 2020 Jun 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-900737

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Across the U.S., various social distancing measures were implemented to control COVID-19 pandemic. However, there is uncertainty in the effectiveness of such measures for specific regions with varying population demographics and different levels of adherence to social distancing. The objective of this paper is to determine the impact of social distancing measures in unique regions. METHODS: We developed COVid-19 Agent-based simulation Model (COVAM), an agent-based simulation model (ABM) that represents the social network and interactions among the people in a region considering population demographics, limited testing availability, imported infections from outside of the region, asymptomatic disease transmission, and adherence to social distancing measures. We adopted COVAM to represent COVID-19-associated events in Dane County, Wisconsin, Milwaukee metropolitan area, and New York City (NYC). We used COVAM to evaluate the impact of three different aspects of social distancing: 1) Adherence to social distancing measures; 2) timing of implementing social distancing; and 3) timing of easing social distancing. RESULTS: We found that the timing of social distancing and adherence level had a major effect on COVID-19 occurrence. For example, in NYC, implementing social distancing measures on March 5, 2020 instead of March 12, 2020 would have reduced the total number of confirmed cases from 191,984 to 43,968 as of May 30, whereas a 1-week delay in implementing such measures could have increased the number of confirmed cases to 1,299,420. Easing social distancing measures on June 1, 2020 instead of June 15, 2020 in NYC would increase the total number of confirmed cases from 275,587 to 379,858 as of July 31. CONCLUSION: The timing of implementing social distancing measures, adherence to the measures, and timing of their easing have major effects on the number of COVID-19 cases.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL