Improving modelling for epidemic responses: reflections from members of the UK infectious disease modelling community on their experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic (preprint)

The COVID-19 pandemic both relied and placed significant burdens on the experts involved from research and public health sectors. The sustained high pressure of a pandemic on responders, such as healthcare workers, can lead to lasting psychological impacts including acute stress disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, burnout, and moral injury, which can impact individual wellbeing and productivity. As members of the infectious disease modelling community, we convened a reflective workshop to understand the professional and personal impacts of response work on our community and to propose recommendations for future epidemic responses. The attendees represented a range of career stages, institutions, and disciplines. This piece was collectively produced by those present at the session based on our collective experiences. Key issues we identified at the workshop were lack of institutional support, insecure contracts, unequal credit and recognition, and mental health impacts. Our recommendations include rewarding impactful work, fostering academia-public health collaboration, decreasing dependence on key individuals by developing teams, increasing transparency in decision-making, and implementing sustainable work practices. Despite limitations in representation, this workshop provided valuable insights into the UK COVID-19 modelling experience and guidance for future public health crises. Recognising and addressing the issues highlighted here is crucial, in our view, for ensuring the effectiveness of epidemic response work in the future.

The role of regular asymptomatic testing in reducing the impact of a COVID-19 wave (preprint)

Testing for infection with SARS-CoV-2 is an important intervention in reducing onwards transmission of COVID-19, particularly when combined with the isolation and contact-tracing of positive cases. Many countries with the capacity to do so have made use of lab-processed Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) testing targeted at individuals with symptoms and the contacts of confirmed cases. Alternatively, Lateral Flow Tests (LFTs) are able to deliver a result quickly, without lab-processing and at a relatively low cost. Their adoption can support regular mass asymptomatic testing, allowing earlier detection of infection and isolation of infectious individuals. In this paper we extend and apply the agent-based epidemic modelling framework Covasim to explore the impact of regular asymptomatic testing on the peak and total number of infections in an emerging COVID-19 wave. We explore testing with LFTs at different frequency levels within a population with high levels of immunity and with background symptomatic PCR testing, case isolation and contact tracing for testing. The effectiveness of regular asymptomatic testing was compared with `lockdown' interventions seeking to reduce the number of non-household contacts across the whole population through measures such as mandating working from home and restrictions on gatherings. Since regular asymptomatic testing requires only those with a positive result to reduce contact, while lockdown measures require the whole population to reduce contact, any policy decision that seeks to trade off harms from infection against other harms will not automatically favour one over the other. Our results demonstrate that, where such a trade off is being made, at moderate rates of early exponential growth regular asymptomatic testing has the potential to achieve significant infection control without the wider harms associated with additional lockdown measures.

Public perceptions and interactions with UK COVID-19 Test, Trace and Isolate policies, and implications for pandemic infectious disease modelling (preprint)

The efforts to contain SARS-CoV-2 and reduce the impact of COVID-19 have been supported by Test, Trace and Isolate (TTI) systems in many settings, including the United Kingdom. The mathematical models underlying policy decisions about TTI make assumptions about behaviour in the context of a rapidly unfolding and changeable emergency. This study investigates the reported behaviours of UK citizens in July 2021, assesses them against how a set of TTI processes are conceptualised and represented in models and then interprets the findings with modellers who have been contributing evidence to TTI policy. We report on testing practices, including the uses of and trust in different types of testing, and the challenges of testing and isolating faced by different demographic groups. The study demonstrates the potential of input from members of the public to benefit the modelling process, from guiding the choice of research questions, influencing choice of model structure, informing parameter ranges and validating or challenging assumptions, to highlighting where model assumptions are reasonable or where their poor reflection of practice might lead to uninformative results. We conclude that deeper engagement with members of the public should be integrated at regular stages of public health intervention modelling.

Engagement and adherence trade-offs for SARS-CoV-2 contact tracing (preprint)

Contact tracing is an important tool for allowing countries to ease lockdown policies introduced to combat SARS-CoV-2. For contact tracing to be effective, those with symptoms must self-report themselves while their contacts must self-isolate when asked. However, policies such as legal enforcement of self-isolation can create trade-offs by dissuading individuals from self-reporting. We use an existing branching process model to examine which aspects of contact tracing adherence should be prioritised. We consider an inverse relationship between self-isolation adherence and self-reporting engagement, assuming that increasingly strict self-isolation policies will result in fewer individuals self-reporting to the programme. We find that policies that increase the verage duration of self-isolation, or that increase the probability that people self-isolate at all, at the expense of reduced self-reporting rate, will not decrease the risk of a large outbreak and may increase the risk, depending on the strength of the trade-off. These results suggest that policies to increase self-isolation adherence should be implemented carefully. Policies that increase self-isolation adherence at the cost of self-reporting rates should be avoided.

Dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 with Waning Immunity in the UK Population (preprint)

The dynamics of immunity are crucial to understanding the long-term patterns of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. While the duration and strength of immunity to SARS-CoV-2 is currently unknown, specific antibody titres to related coronaviruses SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV have been shown to wane in recovered individuals, and immunity to seasonal circulating coronaviruses is estimated to be shorter than one year. Using an age-structured, deterministic model, we explore different potential immunity dynamics using contact data from the UK population. In the scenario where immunity to SARS-CoV-2 lasts an average of three months for non-hospitalised individuals, a year for hospitalised individuals, and the effective reproduction number (Rt) after lockdown is 1.2 (our worst case scenario), we find that the secondary peak occurs in winter 2020 with a daily maximum of 409,000 infectious individuals; almost three-fold greater than in a scenario with permanent immunity. Our models suggests that longitudinal serological surveys to determine if immunity in the population is waning will be most informative when sampling takes place from the end of the lockdown until autumn 2020. After this period, the proportion of the population with antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 is expected to increase due to the secondary peak. Overall, our analysis presents considerations for policy makers on the longer term dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 in the UK and suggests that strategies designed to achieve herd immunity may lead to repeated waves of infection if immunity to re-infection is not permanent.

An imperfect tool: COVID-19 'test & trace' success relies on minimising the impact of false negatives and continuation of physical distancing. (preprint)

Background: Following a consistent decline in COVID-19-related deaths in the UK throughout May 2020, it is recognised that contact tracing will be vital to relaxing physical distancing measures. The increasingly evident role of asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic transmission means testing is central to control, but test sensitivity estimates are as low as 65%. Methods: We extend an existing UK-focused branching process model for contact tracing, adding diagnostic testing and refining parameter estimates to demonstrate the impact of poor test sensitivity and suggest mitigation methods. We also investigate the role of super-spreading events, providing estimates of the relationship between infections, cases detected and hospitalisations, and consider how tracing coverage and speed affects outbreak risk. Findings: Incorporating poor sensitivity testing into tracing protocols could reduce efficacy, due to false negative results impacting isolation duration. However, a 7-day isolation period for all negative-testing individuals could mitigate this effect. Similarly, reducing delays to testing following exposure has a negligible impact on the risk of future outbreaks, but could undermine control if negative-testing individuals immediately cease isolating. Even 100% tracing of contacts will miss cases, which could prompt large localised outbreaks if physical distancing measures are relaxed prematurely. Interpretation: It is imperative that test results are interpreted with caution due to high false-negative rates and that contact tracing is used in combination with physical distancing measures. If the risks associated with imperfect test sensitivity are mitigated, we find that contact tracing can facilitate control when the reproduction number with physical distancing, Rs, is less than 1.5.