Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 17 de 17
Filter
1.
Afr J AIDS Res ; 21(2): 162-170, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1963327

ABSTRACT

Background: The impact of school closures due to COVID-19 raised widespread concerns about children's health and well-being. We examine the impact on the sexual health needs of learners in the context of COVID-19 related lockdowns in rural KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.Methods: In july-November 2020 and August-November 2021 we conducted 24 in-depth interviews and 8 group discussions with teachers and learners from 4 schools, community members and key education stakeholders. All interviews were conducted by telephone. We used a thematic analysis approach and Nvivo 12 software to manage the data.Results: Four main themes related to the COVID-19 pandemic emerged from the data: the sexual and reproductive health (SRH) of learners in the lead-up to the pandemic; the impact of COVID-19 on learners' SRH and wellbeing; the opportunities schools provided to support sexual well-being of learners during the pandemic; and the role of schools in supporting SRH for learners during the pandemic. Learners and stakeholders reported that the SRH of young people was affected by alcohol misuse, poor SRH knowledge and few pathways to link learners with services. Stakeholders working with schools reported that a lack of access to biomedical interventions (e.g., contraception) increased learner pregnancies. Gender-based violence in learners' households was reported to have increased during the COVID-19 pandemic related to loss of income. School closures disrupted the provision of a safe space to provide SRH and HIV-education through Life Orientation lessons and school nurse talks. This loss of a safe space also left learners vulnerable to sexual and physical violence. However, once schools re-opened, daily COVID-19 screening in schools provided the opportunity to identify and support vulnerable children who had other social needs (food and uniforms).Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic may have increased SRH needs and vulnerability of school-going children in a high HIV-burden rural setting. School shutdowns reduced the opportunity for schools to provide a vital safe space and information to enhance SRH for adolescents. Schools play a vital health promotion and social protection role.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , HIV Infections , Sexual Health , Adolescent , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child , Communicable Disease Control , Female , HIV Infections/epidemiology , Humans , Pandemics , Pregnancy , Reproductive Health , Sexual Behavior , Sexual Health/education , South Africa/epidemiology
2.
MEDLINE; 2020.
Non-conventional in English | MEDLINE | ID: grc-750467

ABSTRACT

Background Healthcare resource constraints in low and middle-income countries necessitate selection of cost-effective public health interventions to address COVID-19. Methods We developed a dynamic COVID-19 microsimulation model to evaluate clinical and economic outcomes and cost-effectiveness of epidemic control strategies in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Interventions assessed were Healthcare Testing (HT), where diagnostic testing is performed only for those presenting to healthcare centres;Contact Tracing (CT) in households of cases;Isolation Centres (IC), for cases not requiring hospitalisation;community health worker-led Mass Symptom Screening and diagnostic testing for symptomatic individuals (MS);and Quarantine Centres (QC), for contacts who test negative. Given uncertainties about epidemic dynamics in South Africa, we evaluated two main epidemic scenarios over 360 days, with effective reproduction numbers (R e ) of 1.5 and 1.2. We compared HT, HT+CT, HT+CT+IC, HT+CT+IC+MS, HT+CT+IC+QC, and HT+CT+IC+MS+QC, considering strategies with incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) <US$1,290/year-of-life saved (YLS) to be cost-effective. Findings With R e 1.5, HT resulted in the most COVID-19 deaths and lowest costs over 360 days. Compared with HT, HT+CT+IC+MS reduced mortality by 76%, increased costs by 16%, and was cost-effective (ICER $350/YLS). HT+CT+IC+MS+QC provided the greatest reduction in mortality, but increased costs by 95% compared with HT+CT+IC+MS and was not cost-effective (ICER $8,000/YLS). With R e 1.2, HT+CT+IC+MS was the least costly strategy, and HT+CT+IC+MS+QC was not cost-effective (ICER $294,320/YLS). Interpretation In South Africa, a strategy of household contact tracing, isolation, and mass symptom screening would substantially reduce COVID-19 mortality and be cost-effective. Adding quarantine centres for COVID-19 contacts is not cost-effective.

3.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(9): e2908-e2917, 2021 11 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1501002

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: We projected the clinical and economic impact of alternative testing strategies on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) incidence and mortality in Massachusetts using a microsimulation model. METHODS: We compared 4 testing strategies: (1) hospitalized: polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing only for patients with severe/critical symptoms warranting hospitalization; (2) symptomatic: PCR for any COVID-19-consistent symptoms, with self-isolation if positive; (3) symptomatic + asymptomatic once: symptomatic and 1-time PCR for the entire population; and (4) symptomatic + asymptomatic monthly: symptomatic with monthly retesting for the entire population. We examined effective reproduction numbers (Re = 0.9-2.0) at which policy conclusions would change. We assumed homogeneous mixing among the Massachusetts population (excluding those residing in long-term care facilities). We used published data on disease progression and mortality, transmission, PCR sensitivity/specificity (70%/100%), and costs. Model-projected outcomes included infections, deaths, tests performed, hospital-days, and costs over 180 days, as well as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs, $/quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]). RESULTS: At Re = 0.9, symptomatic + asymptomatic monthly vs hospitalized resulted in a 64% reduction in infections and a 46% reduction in deaths, but required >66-fold more tests/day with 5-fold higher costs. Symptomatic + asymptomatic monthly had an ICER <$100 000/QALY only when Re ≥1.6; when test cost was ≤$3, every 14-day testing was cost-effective at all Re examined. CONCLUSIONS: Testing people with any COVID-19-consistent symptoms would be cost-saving compared to testing only those whose symptoms warrant hospital care. Expanding PCR testing to asymptomatic people would decrease infections, deaths, and hospitalizations. Despite modest sensitivity, low-cost, repeat screening of the entire population could be cost-effective in all epidemic settings.

4.
Nat Commun ; 12(1): 6238, 2021 10 29.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1493104

ABSTRACT

Low- and middle-income countries are implementing COVID-19 vaccination strategies in light of varying vaccine efficacies and costs, supply shortages, and resource constraints. Here, we use a microsimulation model to evaluate clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of a COVID-19 vaccination program in South Africa. We varied vaccination coverage, pace, acceptance, effectiveness, and cost as well as epidemic dynamics. Providing vaccines to at least 40% of the population and prioritizing vaccine rollout prevented >9 million infections and >73,000 deaths and reduced costs due to fewer hospitalizations. Model results were most sensitive to assumptions about epidemic growth and prevalence of prior immunity to SARS-CoV-2, though the vaccination program still provided high value and decreased both deaths and health care costs across a wide range of assumptions. Vaccination program implementation factors, including prompt procurement, distribution, and rollout, are likely more influential than characteristics of the vaccine itself in maximizing public health benefits and economic efficiency.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , COVID-19/prevention & control , Cost-Benefit Analysis/methods , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , COVID-19/immunology , Hospitalization/statistics & numerical data , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , South Africa
5.
BMC Infect Dis ; 21(1): 928, 2021 Sep 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1403222

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: South Africa implemented rapid and strict physical distancing regulations to minimize SARS-CoV-2 epidemic spread. Evidence on the impact of such measures on interpersonal contact in rural and lower-income settings is limited. METHODS: We compared population-representative social contact surveys conducted in the same rural KwaZulu-Natal location once in 2019 and twice in mid-2020. Respondents reported characteristics of physical and conversational ('close interaction') contacts over 24 hours. We built age-mixing matrices and estimated the proportional change in the SARS-CoV-2 reproduction number (R0). Respondents also reported counts of others present at locations visited and transport used, from which we evaluated change in potential exposure to airborne infection due to shared indoor space ('shared air'). RESULTS: Respondents in March-December 2019 (n = 1704) reported a mean of 7.4 close interaction contacts and 196 shared air person-hours beyond their homes. Respondents in June-July 2020 (n = 216), as the epidemic peaked locally, reported 4.1 close interaction contacts and 21 shared air person-hours outside their home, with significant declines in others' homes and public spaces. Adults aged over 50 had fewer close contacts with others over 50, but little change in contact with 15-29 year olds, reflecting ongoing contact within multigenerational households. We estimate potential R0 fell by 42% (95% plausible range 14-59%) between 2019 and June-July 2020. CONCLUSIONS: Extra-household social contact fell substantially following imposition of Covid-19 distancing regulations in rural South Africa. Ongoing contact within intergenerational households highlighted a potential limitation of social distancing measures in protecting older adults.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Epidemics , Aged , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Physical Distancing , SARS-CoV-2 , South Africa/epidemiology
6.
Clin Infect Dis ; 73(Suppl 2): S120-S126, 2021 07 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1334200

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Weeks after issuing social distancing orders to suppress severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmission and reduce growth in cases of severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), all US states and the District of Columbia partially or fully relaxed these measures. METHODS: We identified all statewide social distancing measures that were implemented and/or relaxed in the United States between 10 March and 15 July 2020, triangulating data from state government and third-party sources. Using segmented linear regression, we estimated the extent to which relaxation of social distancing affected epidemic control, as indicated by the time-varying, state-specific effective reproduction number (Rt). RESULTS: In the 8 weeks prior to relaxation, mean Rt declined by 0.012 units per day (95% confidence interval [CI], -.013 to -.012), and 46/51 jurisdictions achieved Rt < 1.0 by the date of relaxation. After relaxation of social distancing, Rt reversed course and began increasing by 0.007 units per day (95% CI, .006-.007), reaching a mean Rt of 1.16. Eight weeks later, the mean Rt was 1.16 and only 9/51 jurisdictions were maintaining an Rt < 1.0. Parallel models showed similar reversals in the growth of COVID-19 cases and deaths. Indicators often used to motivate relaxation at the time of relaxation (eg, test positivity rate <5%) predicted greater postrelaxation epidemic growth. CONCLUSIONS: We detected an immediate and significant reversal in SARS-CoV-2 epidemic suppression after relaxation of social distancing measures across the United States. Premature relaxation of social distancing measures undermined the country's ability to control the disease burden associated with COVID-19.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Basic Reproduction Number , District of Columbia , Humans , Physical Distancing , SARS-CoV-2 , United States/epidemiology
7.
JMIR Public Health Surveill ; 7(5): e26073, 2021 05 13.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1249617

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In March 2020, South Africa implemented strict nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to contain the spread of COVID-19. Over the subsequent 5 months, NPI policies were eased in stages according to a national strategy. COVID-19 spread throughout the country heterogeneously; the disease reached rural areas by July and case numbers peaked from July to August. A second COVID-19 wave began in late 2020. Data on the impact of NPI policies on social and economic well-being and access to health care are limited. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine how rural residents in three South African provinces changed their behaviors during the first COVID-19 epidemic wave. METHODS: The South African Population Research Infrastructure Network nodes in the Mpumalanga (Agincourt), KwaZulu-Natal, (Africa Health Research Institute) and Limpopo (Dikgale-Mamabolo-Mothiba) provinces conducted up to 14 rounds of longitudinal telephone surveys among randomly sampled households from rural and periurban surveillance populations every 2-3 weeks. Interviews included questions on the following topics: COVID-19-related knowledge and behaviors, the health and economic impacts of NPIs, and mental health. We analyzed how responses varied based on NPI stringency and household sociodemographics. RESULTS: In total, 5120 households completed 23,095 interviews between April and December 2020. Respondents' self-reported satisfaction with their COVID-19-related knowledge and face mask use rapidly rose to 85% and 95%, respectively, by August. As selected NPIs were eased, the amount of travel increased, economic losses were reduced, and the prevalence of anxiety and depression symptoms fell. When the number of COVID-19 cases spiked at one node in July, the amount of travel dropped rapidly and the rate of missed daily medications doubled. Households where more adults received government-funded old-age pensions reported concerns about economic matters and medication access less often. CONCLUSIONS: South Africans complied with stringent, COVID-19-related NPIs despite the threat of substantial social, economic, and health repercussions. Government-supported social welfare programs appeared to buffer interruptions in income and health care access during local outbreaks. Epidemic control policies must be balanced against the broader well-being of people in resource-limited settings and designed with parallel support systems when such policies threaten peoples' income and access to basic services.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Epidemics/prevention & control , Health Behavior , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Income/statistics & numerical data , Public Policy , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Prospective Studies , Rural Population/statistics & numerical data , South Africa/epidemiology , Surveys and Questionnaires
8.
R Soc Open Sci ; 8(3): 201491, 2021 Mar 24.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1177360

ABSTRACT

We use an individual-level transmission and contact simulation model to explore the effectiveness and resource requirements of various test-trace-isolate (TTI) strategies for reducing the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in the UK, in the context of different scenarios with varying levels of stringency of non-pharmaceutical interventions. Based on modelling results, we show that self-isolation of symptomatic individuals and quarantine of their household contacts has a substantial impact on the number of new infections generated by each primary case. We further show that adding contact tracing of non-household contacts of confirmed cases to this broader package of interventions reduces the number of new infections otherwise generated by 5-15%. We also explore impact of key factors, such as tracing application adoption and testing delay, on overall effectiveness of TTI.

9.
Wellcome Open Res ; 5: 109, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1027389

ABSTRACT

A coordinated system of disease surveillance will be critical to effectively control the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic. Such systems enable rapid detection and mapping of epidemics and inform allocation of scarce prevention and intervention resources. Although many lower- and middle-income settings lack infrastructure for optimal disease surveillance, health and demographic surveillance systems (HDSS) provide a unique opportunity for epidemic monitoring. This protocol describes a surveillance program at the Africa Health Research Institute's Population Intervention Platform site in northern KwaZulu-Natal. The program leverages a longstanding HDSS in a rural, resource-limited setting with very high prevalence of HIV and tuberculosis to perform Covid-19 surveillance. Our primary aims include: describing the epidemiology of the Covid-19 epidemic in rural KwaZulu-Natal; determining the impact of the Covid-19 outbreak and non-pharmaceutical control interventions (NPI) on behaviour and wellbeing; determining the impact of HIV and tuberculosis on Covid-19 susceptibility; and using collected data to support the local public-sector health response. The program involves telephone-based interviews with over 20,000 households every four months, plus a sub-study calling 750 households every two weeks. Each call asks a household representative how the epidemic and NPI are affecting the household and conducts a Covid-19 risk screen for all resident members. Any individuals screening positive are invited to a clinical screen, potential test and referral to necessary care - conducted in-person near their home following careful risk minimization procedures. In this protocol we report the details of our cohort design, questionnaires, data and reporting structures, and standard operating procedures in hopes that our project can inform similar efforts elsewhere.

10.
JAMA Netw Open ; 3(12): e2028195, 2020 12 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-985881

ABSTRACT

Importance: Approximately 356 000 people stay in homeless shelters nightly in the United States. They have high risk of contracting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Objective: To assess the estimated clinical outcomes, costs, and cost-effectiveness associated with strategies for COVID-19 management among adults experiencing sheltered homelessness. Design, Setting, and Participants: This decision analytic model used a simulated cohort of 2258 adults residing in homeless shelters in Boston, Massachusetts. Cohort characteristics and costs were adapted from Boston Health Care for the Homeless Program. Disease progression, transmission, and outcomes data were taken from published literature and national databases. Surging, growing, and slowing epidemics (effective reproduction numbers [Re], 2.6, 1.3, and 0.9, respectively) were examined. Costs were from a health care sector perspective, and the time horizon was 4 months, from April to August 2020. Exposures: Daily symptom screening with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing of individuals with positive symptom screening results, universal PCR testing every 2 weeks, hospital-based COVID-19 care, alternative care sites (ACSs) for mild or moderate COVID-19, and temporary housing were each compared with no intervention. Main Outcomes and Measures: Cumulative infections and hospital-days, costs to the health care sector (US dollars), and cost-effectiveness, as incremental cost per case of COVID-19 prevented. Results: The simulated population of 2258 sheltered homeless adults had a mean (SD) age of 42.6 (9.04) years. Compared with no intervention, daily symptom screening with ACSs for pending tests or confirmed COVID-19 and mild or moderate disease was associated with 37% fewer infections (1954 vs 1239) and 46% lower costs ($6.10 million vs $3.27 million) at an Re of 2.6, 75% fewer infections (538 vs 137) and 72% lower costs ($1.46 million vs $0.41 million) at an Re of 1.3, and 51% fewer infections (174 vs 85) and 51% lower costs ($0.54 million vs $0.26 million) at an Re of 0.9. Adding PCR testing every 2 weeks was associated with a further decrease in infections; incremental cost per case prevented was $1000 at an Re of 2.6, $27 000 at an Re of 1.3, and $71 000 at an Re of 0.9. Temporary housing with PCR every 2 weeks was most effective but substantially more expensive than other options. Compared with no intervention, temporary housing with PCR every 2 weeks was associated with 81% fewer infections (376) and 542% higher costs ($39.12 million) at an Re of 2.6, 82% fewer infections (95) and 2568% higher costs ($38.97 million) at an Re of 1.3, and 59% fewer infections (71) and 7114% higher costs ($38.94 million) at an Re of 0.9. Results were sensitive to cost and sensitivity of PCR and ACS efficacy in preventing transmission. Conclusions and Relevance: In this modeling study of simulated adults living in homeless shelters, daily symptom screening and ACSs were associated with fewer severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections and decreased costs compared with no intervention. In a modeled surging epidemic, adding universal PCR testing every 2 weeks was associated with further decrease in SARS-CoV-2 infections at modest incremental cost and should be considered during future surges.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Health Care Costs , Hospitalization/economics , Housing/economics , Ill-Housed Persons , Mass Screening/methods , COVID-19/economics , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/transmission , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/economics , COVID-19 Nucleic Acid Testing/methods , Cohort Studies , Communicable Disease Control/economics , Computer Simulation , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Decision Support Techniques , Humans , Mass Screening/economics , SARS-CoV-2 , Symptom Assessment/economics , Symptom Assessment/methods , United States/epidemiology
11.
Lancet Glob Health ; 9(2): e120-e129, 2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-922185

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Health-care resource constraints in low-income and middle-income countries necessitate the identification of cost-effective public health interventions to address COVID-19. We aimed to develop a dynamic COVID-19 microsimulation model to assess clinical and economic outcomes and cost-effectiveness of epidemic control strategies in KwaZulu-Natal province, South Africa. METHODS: We compared different combinations of five public health interventions: health-care testing alone, where diagnostic testing is done only for individuals presenting to health-care centres; contact tracing in households of cases; isolation centres, for cases not requiring hospital admission; mass symptom screening and molecular testing for symptomatic individuals by community health-care workers; and quarantine centres, for household contacts who test negative. We calibrated infection transmission rates to match effective reproduction number (Re) estimates reported in South Africa. We assessed two main epidemic scenarios for a period of 360 days, with an Re of 1·5 and 1·2. Strategies with incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of less than US$3250 per year of life saved were considered cost-effective. We also did sensitivity analyses by varying key parameters (Re values, molecular testing sensitivity, and efficacies and costs of interventions) to determine the effect on clinical and cost projections. FINDINGS: When Re was 1·5, health-care testing alone resulted in the highest number of COVID-19 deaths during the 360-day period. Compared with health-care testing alone, a combination of health-care testing, contact tracing, use of isolation centres, mass symptom screening, and use of quarantine centres reduced mortality by 94%, increased health-care costs by 33%, and was cost-effective (ICER $340 per year of life saved). In settings where quarantine centres were not feasible, a combination of health-care testing, contact tracing, use of isolation centres, and mass symptom screening was cost-effective compared with health-care testing alone (ICER $590 per year of life saved). When Re was 1·2, health-care testing, contact tracing, use of isolation centres, and use of quarantine centres was the least costly strategy, and no other strategies were cost-effective. In sensitivity analyses, a combination of health-care testing, contact tracing, use of isolation centres, mass symptom screening, and use of quarantine centres was generally cost-effective, with the exception of scenarios in which Re was 2·6 and when efficacies of isolation centres and quarantine centres for transmission reduction were reduced. INTERPRETATION: In South Africa, strategies involving household contact tracing, isolation, mass symptom screening, and quarantining household contacts who test negative would substantially reduce COVID-19 mortality and would be cost-effective. The optimal combination of interventions depends on epidemic growth characteristics and practical implementation considerations. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health, Royal Society, Wellcome Trust.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Epidemics/prevention & control , Public Health/economics , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , Child , Child, Preschool , Computer Simulation , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Middle Aged , Models, Biological , Public Health/methods , South Africa/epidemiology , Young Adult
12.
medRxiv ; 2020 Oct 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-900747

ABSTRACT

IMPORTANCE: Approximately 356,000 people stay in homeless shelters nightly in the US. They are at high risk for COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: To assess clinical outcomes, costs, and cost-effectiveness of strategies for COVID-19 management among sheltered homeless adults. DESIGN: We developed a dynamic microsimulation model of COVID-19 in sheltered homeless adults in Boston, Massachusetts. We used cohort characteristics and costs from Boston Health Care for the Homeless Program. Disease progression, transmission, and outcomes data were from published literature and national databases. We examined surging, growing, and slowing epidemics (effective reproduction numbers [Re] 2.6, 1.3, and 0.9). Costs were from a health care sector perspective; time horizon was 4 months, from April to August 2020. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Simulated cohort of 2,258 adults residing in homeless shelters in Boston. INTERVENTIONS: We assessed daily symptom screening with polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing of screen-positives, universal PCR testing every 2 weeks, hospital-based COVID-19 care, alternate care sites [ACSs] for mild/moderate COVID-19, and temporary housing, each compared to no intervention. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Cumulative infections and hospital-days, costs to the health care sector (US dollars), and cost-effectiveness, as incremental cost per case prevented of COVID-19. RESULTS: We simulated a population of 2,258 sheltered homeless adults with mean age of 42.6 years. Compared to no intervention, daily symptom screening with ACSs for pending tests or confirmed COVID-19 and mild/moderate disease led to 37% fewer infections and 46% lower costs (Re=2.6), 75% fewer infections and 72% lower costs (Re=1.3), and 51% fewer infections and 51% lower costs (Re=0.9). Adding PCR testing every 2 weeks further decreased infections; incremental cost per case prevented was $1,000 (Re=2.6), $27,000 (Re=1.3), and $71,000 (Re=0.9). Temporary housing with PCR every 2 weeks was most effective but substantially more costly than other options. Results were sensitive to cost and sensitivity of PCR and ACS efficacy in preventing transmission. CONCLUSIONS & RELEVANCE: In this modeling study of simulated adults living in homeless shelters, daily symptom screening and ACSs were associated with fewer COVID-19 infections and decreased costs compared with no intervention. In a modeled surging epidemic, adding universal PCR testing every 2 weeks was associated with further decrease in COVID-19 infections at modest incremental cost and should be considered during future surges.

13.
PLoS Med ; 17(10): e1003376, 2020 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-835926

ABSTRACT

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003244.].

14.
BMJ Open ; 10(10): e043763, 2020 10 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-835490

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated whether implementation of lockdown orders in South Africa affected ambulatory clinic visitation in rural Kwa-Zulu Natal (KZN). DESIGN: Observational cohort SETTING: Data were analysed from 11 primary healthcare clinics in northern KZN. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 46 523 individuals made 89 476 clinic visits during the observation period. EXPOSURE OF INTEREST: We conducted an interrupted time series analysis to estimate changes in clinic visitation with a focus on transitions from the prelockdown to the level 5, 4 and 3 lockdown periods. OUTCOME MEASURES: Daily clinic visitation at ambulatory clinics. In stratified analyses, we assessed visitation for the following subcategories: child health, perinatal care and family planning, HIV services, non-communicable diseases and by age and sex strata. RESULTS: We found no change in total clinic visits/clinic/day at the time of implementation of the level 5 lockdown (change from 90.3 to 84.6 mean visits/clinic/day, 95% CI -16.5 to 3.1), or at the transitions to less stringent level 4 and 3 lockdown levels. We did detect a >50% reduction in child healthcare visits at the start of the level 5 lockdown from 11.9 to 4.7 visits/day (-7.1 visits/clinic/day, 95% CI -8.9 to 5.3), both for children aged <1 year and 1-5 years, with a gradual return to prelockdown within 3 months after the first lockdown measure. In contrast, we found no drop in clinic visitation in adults at the start of the level 5 lockdown, or related to HIV care (from 37.5 to 45.6, 8.0 visits/clinic/day, 95% CI 2.1 to 13.8). CONCLUSIONS: In rural KZN, we identified a significant, although temporary, reduction in child healthcare visitation but general resilience of adult ambulatory care provision during the first 4 months of the lockdown. Future work should explore the impacts of the circulating epidemic on primary care provision and long-term impacts of reduced child visitation on outcomes in the region.


Subject(s)
Ambulatory Care/statistics & numerical data , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Health Services Accessibility/trends , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Primary Health Care , Public Health , Adult , Age Factors , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Family Planning Services/statistics & numerical data , Female , HIV Infections/epidemiology , Humans , Male , Pandemics , Pediatrics/statistics & numerical data , Primary Health Care/methods , Primary Health Care/statistics & numerical data , Public Health/methods , Public Health/statistics & numerical data , Rural Population , SARS-CoV-2
15.
Wellcome Open Res ; 5:109-109, 2020.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-721642

ABSTRACT

A coordinated system of disease surveillance will be critical to effectively control the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic. Such systems enable rapid detection and mapping of epidemics and inform allocation of scarce prevention and intervention resources. Although many lower- and middle-income settings lack infrastructure for optimal disease surveillance, health and demographic surveillance systems (HDSS) provide a unique opportunity for epidemic monitoring. This protocol describes a surveillance program at the Africa Health Research Institute's Population Intervention Platform site in northern KwaZulu-Natal. The program leverages a longstanding HDSS in a rural, resource-limited setting with very high prevalence of HIV and tuberculosis to perform Covid-19 surveillance. Our primary aims include: describing the epidemiology of the Covid-19 epidemic in rural KwaZulu-Natal;determining the impact of the Covid-19 outbreak and non-pharmaceutical control interventions (NPI) on behaviour and wellbeing;determining the impact of HIV and tuberculosis on Covid-19 susceptibility;and using collected data to support the local public-sector health response. The program involves telephone-based interviews with over 20,000 households every four months, plus a sub-study calling 750 households every two weeks. Each call asks a household representative how the epidemic and NPI are affecting the household and conducts a Covid-19 risk screen for all resident members. Any individuals screening positive are invited to a clinical screen, potential test and referral to necessary care - conducted in-person near their home following careful risk minimization procedures. In this protocol we report the details of our cohort design, questionnaires, data and reporting structures, and standard operating procedures in hopes that our project can inform similar efforts elsewhere.

16.
PLoS Med ; 17(8): e1003244, 2020 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-710389

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Social distancing measures to address the US coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic may have notable health and social impacts. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a longitudinal pretest-posttest comparison group study to estimate the change in COVID-19 case growth before versus after implementation of statewide social distancing measures in the US. The primary exposure was time before (14 days prior to, and through 3 days after) versus after (beginning 4 days after, to up to 21 days after) implementation of the first statewide social distancing measures. Statewide restrictions on internal movement were examined as a secondary exposure. The primary outcome was the COVID-19 case growth rate. The secondary outcome was the COVID-19-attributed mortality growth rate. All states initiated social distancing measures between March 10 and March 25, 2020. The mean daily COVID-19 case growth rate decreased beginning 4 days after implementation of the first statewide social distancing measures, by 0.9% per day (95% CI -1.4% to -0.4%; P < 0.001). We did not observe a statistically significant difference in the mean daily case growth rate before versus after implementation of statewide restrictions on internal movement (0.1% per day; 95% CI -0.04% to 0.3%; P = 0.14), but there is substantial difficulty in disentangling the unique associations with statewide restrictions on internal movement from the unique associations with the first social distancing measures. Beginning 7 days after social distancing, the COVID-19-attributed mortality growth rate decreased by 2.0% per day (95% CI -3.0% to -0.9%; P < 0.001). Our analysis is susceptible to potential bias resulting from the aggregate nature of the ecological data, potential confounding by contemporaneous changes (e.g., increases in testing), and potential underestimation of social distancing due to spillover effects from neighboring states. CONCLUSIONS: Statewide social distancing measures were associated with a decrease in the COVID-19 case growth rate that was statistically significant. Statewide social distancing measures were also associated with a decrease in the COVID-19-attributed mortality growth rate beginning 7 days after implementation, although this decrease was no longer statistically significant by 10 days.


Subject(s)
Betacoronavirus/isolation & purification , Communicable Disease Control , Coronavirus Infections , Disease Transmission, Infectious , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Social Isolation , COVID-19 , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Communicable Disease Control/organization & administration , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Disease Transmission, Infectious/prevention & control , Disease Transmission, Infectious/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Mortality , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , SARS-CoV-2 , Time Factors , United States/epidemiology
17.
medRxiv ; 2020 Oct 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-636369

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Healthcare resource constraints in low and middle-income countries necessitate selection of cost-effective public health interventions to address COVID-19. METHODS: We developed a dynamic COVID-19 microsimulation model to evaluate clinical and economic outcomes and cost-effectiveness of epidemic control strategies in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Interventions assessed were Healthcare Testing (HT), where diagnostic testing is performed only for those presenting to healthcare centres; Contact Tracing (CT) in households of cases; Isolation Centres (IC), for cases not requiring hospitalisation; community health worker-led Mass Symptom Screening and molecular testing for symptomatic individuals (MS); and Quarantine Centres (QC), for household contacts who test negative. Given uncertainties about epidemic dynamics in South Africa, we evaluated two main epidemic scenarios over 360 days, with effective reproduction numbers (Re) of 1·5 and 1·2. We compared HT, HT+CT, HT+CT+IC, HT+CT+IC+MS, HT+CT+IC+QC, and HT+CT+IC+MS+QC, considering strategies with incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER)

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL