Potential lessons from the Taiwan and New Zealand health responses to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Approaches to preventing or mitigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic have varied markedly between nations. We examined the approach up to August 2020 taken by two jurisdictions which had successfully eliminated COVID-19 by this time: Taiwan and New Zealand. Taiwan reported a lower COVID-19 incidence rate (20.7 cases per million) compared with NZ (278.0 per million). Extensive public health infrastructure established in Taiwan pre-COVID-19 enabled a fast coordinated response, particularly in the domains of early screening, effective methods for isolation/quarantine, digital technologies for identifying potential cases and mass mask use. This timely and vigorous response allowed Taiwan to avoid the national lockdown used by New Zealand. Many of Taiwan's pandemic control components could potentially be adopted by other jurisdictions.

Transmission Dynamics and Effectiveness of Control Measures during COVID-19 Surge, Taiwan, April-August 2021.

An unprecedented surge of COVID-19 cases in Taiwan in May 2021 led the government to implement strict nationwide control measures beginning May 15. During the surge, the government was able to bring the epidemic under control without a complete lockdown despite the cumulative case count reaching >14,400 and >780 deaths. We investigated the effectiveness of the public health and social measures instituted by the Taiwan government by quantifying the change in the effective reproduction number, which is a summary measure of the ability of the pathogen to spread through the population. The control measures that were instituted reduced the effective reproduction number from 2.0-3.3 to 0.6-0.7. This decrease was correlated with changes in mobility patterns in Taiwan, demonstrating that public compliance, active case finding, and contact tracing were effective measures in preventing further spread of the disease.

Effectiveness of controlling COVID-19 epidemic by implementing soft lockdown policy and extensive community screening in Taiwan.

Strict and repeated lockdowns have caused public fatigue regarding policy compliance and had a large impact on several countries' economies. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of a soft lockdown policy and the strategy of active community screening for controlling COVID-19 in Taiwan. We used village-based daily confirmed COVID-19 statistics in Taipei City and New Taipei City, between May 2, 2021, and July 17, 2021. The temporal Gi* statistic was used to compute the spatiotemporal hotspots. Simple linear regression was used to evaluate the trend of the epidemic, positivity rate from community screening, and mobility changes in COVID-19 cases and incidence before and after a level three alert in both cities. We used a Bayesian hierarchical zero-inflated Poisson model to estimate the daily infection risk. The cities accounted for 11,403 (81.17%) of 14,048 locally confirmed cases. The mean effective reproduction number (Re) surged before the level three alert and peaked on May 16, 2021, the day after the level three alert in Taipei City (Re = 3.66) and New Taipei City (Re = 3.37). Mobility reduction and a lower positive rate were positively associated with a lower number of cases and incidence. In the spatiotemporal view, seven major districts were identified with a radial spreading pattern from one hard-hit district. Villages with a higher inflow degree centrality among people aged ≥ 60 years, having confirmed cases, specific land-use types, and with a higher aging index had higher infection risks than other villages. Early soft lockdown policy and detection of infected patients showed an effective strategy to control COVID-19 in Taiwan.

Comparison of Estimated Effectiveness of Case-Based and Population-Based Interventions on COVID-19 Containment in Taiwan.

Importance: Taiwan is one of the few countries with initial success in COVID-19 control without strict lockdown or school closure. The reasons remain to be fully elucidated. Objective: To compare and evaluate the effectiveness of case-based (including contact tracing and quarantine) and population-based (including social distancing and facial masking) interventions for COVID-19 in Taiwan. Design, Setting, and Participants: This comparative effectiveness study used a stochastic branching process model using COVID-19 epidemic data from Taiwan, an island nation of 23.6 million people, with no locally acquired cases of COVID-19 reported for 253 days between April and December 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Effective reproduction number of COVID-19 cases (the number of secondary cases generated by 1 primary case) and the probability of outbreak extinction (0 new cases within 20 generations). For model development and calibration, an estimation of the incubation period (interval from exposure to symptom onset), serial interval (time between symptom onset in an infector-infectee pair), and the statistical distribution of the number of any subsequent infections generated by 1 primary case was calculated. Results: This study analyzed data from 158 confirmed COVID-19 cases (median age, 45 years; interquartile range, 25-55 years; 84 men [53%]). An estimated 55% (95% credible interval [CrI], 41%-68%) of transmission events occurred during the presymptomatic stage. In our estimated analysis, case detection, contact tracing, and 14-day quarantine of close contacts (regardless of symptoms) was estimated to decrease the reproduction number from the counterfactual value of 2.50 to 1.53 (95% CrI, 1.50-1.57), which would not be sufficient for epidemic control, which requires a value of less than 1. In our estimated analysis, voluntary population-based interventions, if used alone, were estimated to have reduced the reproduction number to 1.30 (95% CrI, 1.03-1.58). Combined case-based and population-based interventions were estimated to reduce the reproduction number to below unity (0.85; 95% CrI, 0.78-0.89). Results were similar for additional analyses with influenza data and sensitivity analyses. Conclusions and Relevance: In this comparative effectiveness research study, the combination of case-based and population-based interventions (with wide adherence) may explain the success of COVID-19 control in Taiwan in 2020. Either category of interventions alone would have been insufficient, even in a country with an effective public health system and comprehensive contact tracing program. Mitigating the COVID-19 pandemic requires the collaborative effort of public health professionals and the general public.

Contact Tracing Assessment of COVID-19 Transmission Dynamics in Taiwan and Risk at Different Exposure Periods Before and After Symptom Onset.

Importance: The dynamics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) transmissibility are yet to be fully understood. Better understanding of the transmission dynamics is important for the development and evaluation of effective control policies. Objective: To delineate the transmission dynamics of COVID-19 and evaluate the transmission risk at different exposure window periods before and after symptom onset. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective case-ascertained study in Taiwan included laboratory-confirmed cases of COVID-19 and their contacts. The study period was from January 15 to March 18, 2020. All close contacts were quarantined at home for 14 days after their last exposure to the index case. During the quarantine period, any relevant symptoms (fever, cough, or other respiratory symptoms) of contacts triggered a COVID-19 test. The final follow-up date was April 2, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: Secondary clinical attack rate (considering symptomatic cases only) for different exposure time windows of the index cases and for different exposure settings (such as household, family, and health care). Results: We enrolled 100 confirmed patients, with a median age of 44 years (range, 11-88 years), including 44 men and 56 women. Among their 2761 close contacts, there were 22 paired index-secondary cases. The overall secondary clinical attack rate was 0.7% (95% CI, 0.4%-1.0%). The attack rate was higher among the 1818 contacts whose exposure to index cases started within 5 days of symptom onset (1.0% [95% CI, 0.6%-1.6%]) compared with those who were exposed later (0 cases from 852 contacts; 95% CI, 0%-0.4%). The 299 contacts with exclusive presymptomatic exposures were also at risk (attack rate, 0.7% [95% CI, 0.2%-2.4%]). The attack rate was higher among household (4.6% [95% CI, 2.3%-9.3%]) and nonhousehold (5.3% [95% CI, 2.1%-12.8%]) family contacts than that in health care or other settings. The attack rates were higher among those aged 40 to 59 years (1.1% [95% CI, 0.6%-2.1%]) and those aged 60 years and older (0.9% [95% CI, 0.3%-2.6%]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, high transmissibility of COVID-19 before and immediately after symptom onset suggests that finding and isolating symptomatic patients alone may not suffice to contain the epidemic, and more generalized measures may be required, such as social distancing.