Early Prompt Response to COVID-19 in Taiwan: Comprehensive surveillance, decisive border control, and information technology support.

Since the COVID-19 outbreak was detected in Wuhan in December 2019 by the event-based surveillance of Taiwan Centers for Disease Control, Taiwan has been aligning risk management to policy planning with the assistance of comprehensive surveillance and regular rapid risk assessments. Taiwan Central Epidemic Command Center (CECC) promptly initiated stepwise border control for major cities and provinces in China, European and American countries, and eventually expanded it to the whole world in March 2020. With stringent quarantine measures, the early response not only successfully blocked the first wave of imported cases, but also slowed down subsequent large local outbreaks. Digital technologies including digital fencing and government database linkage were adopted to facilitate the application of public health interventions and data collection. The experience of Taiwan's prompt and comprehensive response at the early stage may contribute to the preparedness for the next disease X outbreak.

A comprehensive evaluation of COVID-19 policies and outcomes in 50 countries and territories.

The COVID-19 pandemic struck the world unguarded, some places outperformed others in COVID-19 containment. This longitudinal study considered a comparative evaluation of COVID-19 containment across 50 distinctly governed regions between March 2020 and November 2021. Our analysis distinguishes between a pre-vaccine phase (March-November 2020) and a vaccinating phase (December 2020-November 2021). In the first phase, we develop an indicator, termed lockdown efficiency (LE), to estimate the efficacy of measures against monthly case numbers. Nine other indicators were considered, including vaccine-related indicators in the second phase. Linear mixed models are used to explore the relationship between each government policy & hygiene education (GP&HE) indicator and each vital health & socioeconomic (VH&SE) measure. Our ranking shows that surveyed countries in Oceania and Asian outperformed countries in other regions for pandemic containment prior to vaccine development. Their success appears to be associated with non-pharmaceutical interventions, acting early, and adjusting policies as needed. After vaccines have been distributed, maintaining non-pharmacological intervention is the best way to achieve protection from variant viral strains, breakthrough infections, waning vaccine efficacy, and vaccine hesitancy limiting of herd immunity. The findings of the study provide insights into the effectiveness of emerging infectious disease containment policies worldwide.

Taiwan's COVID-19 response: Timely case detection and quarantine, January to June 2020.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has become severe threats to economic, societal, and healthcare systems. To analyze the epidemiological characteristics of the COVID-19 outbreak in Taiwan and evaluate the key interventions, we conducted a retrospective cohort study during January 17-June 30, 2020. As of June 30, the COVID-19 outbreak, including 447 laboratory-confirmed cases, was eliminated by mixed approaches: border control, enhanced surveillance, case detection with contact tracing, quarantine, and population-based interventions like face mask use. The improvement of median time from disease onset to notification (5 days [range -3 to 27] before March 1 to 1 day [range -8 to 22] after March 1) suggested the timeliness and comprehensiveness of surveillance and contact tracing. Travel restrictions with quarantine, resulting in fewer clusters, were also complementary to minimize disease spread. Under combined interventions, Taiwan successfully contained the COVID-19 spread within the country and minimized its impact on the society.

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.

Risk assessment for COVID-19 pandemic in Taiwan.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Event-based surveillance and rapid risk assessment for acute public health events are essential in emerging infectious disease control. Since detecting the unusual signal in Wuhan in December 2019, Taiwan has been aligning risk management to policy planning via conducting regular risk assessments to combat the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This article aims to provide some insights into Taiwan's experiences and corresponding actions for the outbreak. RESULTS: The COVID-19 risk level in Taiwan was raised to "moderate-to-high" in mid-January 2020 when neighboring countries had reported cases and the human-to-human transmission became obvious. The risk level became "high" on 24 January due to China's escalating epidemic situation and imposed a lockdown in Wuhan. We learned that the commander recognized the importance of risk assessments and considered advice from the experts was crucial in making the correct decision at the early stage of the crisis. CONCLUSIONS: Given the surge of COVID-19 cases globally, understanding the evidence-driven mobilizations via detailed risk assessments in Taiwan may be an example worth considering for other countries. We believe that strengthening a global epidemic intelligence network and sharing information in a timely and transparent manner are essential for confronting new challenges of COVID-19 and other emerging infectious diseases.

Contact tracing with digital assistance in Taiwan's COVID-19 outbreak response.

AIM: Comprehensive case investigation and contact tracing are crucial to prevent community spread of COVID-19. We demonstrated a utility of using traditional contact tracing measures supplemented with symptom tracking and contact management system to assist public health workers with high efficiency. METHODS: A centralized contact tracing system was developed to support data linkage, cross-jurisdictional coordination, and follow-up of contacts' health status. We illustrated the process of how digital tools support contact tracing and management of COVID-19 cases and measured the timeliness from case detection to contact monitoring to evaluate system performance. RESULTS: Among the 8051 close contacts of the 487 confirmed cases (16.5 close contacts/case, 95% CI [13.9-19.1]), the median elapsed time from last exposure to quarantine was three days (IQR 1-5). By implementing the approach of self-reporting using automatic text-messages and web-app, the percentage of health status updates from self-reporting increased from 22.5% to 61.5%. The high proportion of secondary cases detected via contact tracing (88%) might reduce the R0 to under one and minimize the impact of local transmission in the community. CONCLUSION: Comprehensive contact tracing and management with complementary technology would still be a pillar of strategies for containing outbreaks during de-escalation or early in the next wave of COVID-19 pandemic.

An Overview of the COVID-19 Pandemic and Risk Assessment, July, 2020

In late 2019, the novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak was first identified in Wuhan, China, and subsequently spread worldwide. By July 11, 2020, the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases reached 12,881,555 (including 599,146 deaths) in 187 countries/ territories. The pandemic has not reach its peak yet. The situations of epidemics in the United States, Central and South Americas, and South Asia were still serious. Some countries faced re-surging epidemic after lifting restrictions. In Taiwan, the first imported case and the indigenous case were reported on January 21, and 28, respectively. As of July 12, the cumulative number of confirmed cases was 451, including 360 imported cases, 55 indigenous cases, and another 36 cases of naval crew members aboard the Panshi fast combat support ship. Currently the COVID-19 cases in Taiwan were still sporadic imported cases. No locally-acquired case was found for more than 8 weeks. Based on the current epidemic status, the risks of imported cases are still high. The high transmissibility of the virus and the potential of community outbreak remained as a threat to Taiwan's health system and society. Therefore, the overall risk of COVID-19 is considered high domestically.

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.