Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 9 de 9
Filter
1.
BMC Public Health ; 23(1): 906, 2023 05 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2326692

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Most countries around the world enforced non-pharmaceutical interventions against COVID-19. Italy was one of the first countries to be affected by the pandemic, imposing a hard lockdown, in the first epidemic wave. During the second wave, the country implemented progressively restrictive tiers at the regional level according to weekly epidemiological risk assessments. This paper quantifies the impact of these restrictions on contacts and on the reproduction number. METHODS: Representative (with respect to age, sex, and region of residence) longitudinal surveys of the Italian population were undertaken during the second epidemic wave. Epidemiologically relevant contact patterns were measured and compared with pre-pandemic levels and according to the level of interventions experienced by the participants. Contact matrices were used to quantify the reduction in the number of contacts by age group and contact setting. The reproduction number was estimated to evaluate the impact of restrictions on the spread of COVID-19. RESULTS: The comparison with the pre-pandemic baseline shows a significant decrease in the number of contacts, independently from the age group or contact settings. This decrease in the number of contacts significantly depends on the strictness of the non-pharmaceutical interventions. For all levels of strictness considered, the reduction in social mixing results in a reproduction number smaller than one. In particular, the impact of the restriction on the number of contacts decreases with the severity of the interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The progressive restriction tiers implemented in Italy reduced the reproduction number, with stricter interventions associated with higher reductions. Readily collected contact data can inform the implementation of mitigation measures at the national level in epidemic emergencies to come.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Communicable Disease Control/methods , Pandemics/prevention & control , Italy/epidemiology
2.
BMC Infect Dis ; 23(1): 268, 2023 Apr 26.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2305784

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Most countries have enacted some restrictions to reduce social contacts to slow down disease transmission during the COVID-19 pandemic. For nearly two years, individuals likely also adopted new behaviours to avoid pathogen exposure based on personal circumstances. We aimed to understand the way in which different factors affect social contacts - a critical step to improving future pandemic responses. METHODS: The analysis was based on repeated cross-sectional contact survey data collected in a standardized international study from 21 European countries between March 2020 and March 2022. We calculated the mean daily contacts reported using a clustered bootstrap by country and by settings (at home, at work, or in other settings). Where data were available, contact rates during the study period were compared with rates recorded prior to the pandemic. We fitted censored individual-level generalized additive mixed models to examine the effects of various factors on the number of social contacts. RESULTS: The survey recorded 463,336 observations from 96,456 participants. In all countries where comparison data were available, contact rates over the previous two years were substantially lower than those seen prior to the pandemic (approximately from over 10 to < 5), predominantly due to fewer contacts outside the home. Government restrictions imposed immediate effect on contacts, and these effects lingered after the restrictions were lifted. Across countries, the relationships between national policy, individual perceptions, or personal circumstances determining contacts varied. CONCLUSIONS: Our study, coordinated at the regional level, provides important insights into the understanding of the factors associated with social contacts to support future infectious disease outbreak responses.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , Cross-Sectional Studies , Europe/epidemiology
3.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ; 22(1): 757, 2022 Oct 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2064762

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Evidence and advice for pregnant women evolved during the COVID-19 pandemic. We studied social contact behaviour and vaccine uptake in pregnant women between March 2020 and September 2021 in 19 European countries. METHODS: In each country, repeated online survey data were collected from a panel of nationally-representative participants. We calculated the adjusted mean number of contacts reported with an individual-level generalized additive mixed model, modelled using the negative binomial distribution and a log link function. Mean proportion of people in isolation or quarantine, and vaccination coverage by pregnancy status and gender were calculated using a clustered bootstrap. FINDINGS: We recorded 4,129 observations from 1,041 pregnant women, and 115,359 observations from 29,860 non-pregnant individuals aged 18-49. Pregnant women made slightly fewer contacts (3.6, 95%CI = 3.5-3.7) than non-pregnant women (4.0, 95%CI = 3.9-4.0), driven by fewer work contacts but marginally more contacts in non-essential social settings. Approximately 15-20% pregnant and 5% of non-pregnant individuals reported to be in isolation and quarantine for large parts of the study period. COVID-19 vaccine coverage was higher in pregnant women than in non-pregnant women between January and April 2021. Since May 2021, vaccination in non-pregnant women began to increase and surpassed that in pregnant women. INTERPRETATION: Limited social contact to avoid pathogen exposure during the COVID-19 pandemic has been a challenge to many, especially women going through pregnancy. More recognition of maternal social support desire is needed in the ongoing pandemic. As COVID-19 vaccination continues to remain an important pillar of outbreak response, strategies to promote correct information can provide reassurance and facilitate informed pregnancy vaccine decisions in this vulnerable group.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Female , Humans , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pregnancy , Pregnant Women , Vaccination
4.
Public Health Pract (Oxf) ; 4: 100325, 2022 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-2061794

ABSTRACT

Objectives: Non-pharmaceutical interventions have been crucial to reduce transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in many countries including the United Kingdom. A key research priority has been to better understand psychological and social determinants of health behaviours. We aimed to quantify the impact of luck perception on contact and preventive behaviours among adults in the UK, adjusting for key confounders. Study design: A cross-sectional study. Methods: Data were collected between July 28 and August 31, 2020. Luck perception, which refers to a belief whether individual's SARS-CoV-2 infection status is determined by fate or chance, was measured using Chance score, drawing on Health Locus of Control Theory. Self-reporting online questionnaires were administered to obtain participants' contact patterns and frequencies of avoiding crowds, hand washing and wearing a mask. Associations between luck perception and protective behaviours and contact patterns were quantified using regression models. Results: Data from 233 survey respondents were analysed. Chance score was negatively associated with all protective behaviours; avoiding crowds (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25-0.86, p = 0.02), washing hands (aOR 0.35, 95%CI 0.17-0.70, p = 0.003), and wearing masks (aOR 0.58, 95%CI 0.34-0.99, p = 0.046). For non-physical contacts (with or without distancing), a significant interaction was identified between Chance score and ethnicity. Chance score increased the number of non-physical contacts among white British, an opposite trend was observed for non-white participants. Conclusions: Luck perception during the pandemic may affect individuals' health protection behaviours and contact patterns. Further mechanistic understandings of human behaviours against infectious diseases are indispensable for effective response to future pandemics.

5.
BMC Infect Dis ; 22(1): 242, 2022 Mar 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1736350

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The San Francisco Bay Area was the first region in the United States to enact school closures to mitigate SARS-CoV-2 transmission. The effects of closures on contact patterns for schoolchildren and their household members remain poorly understood. METHODS: We conducted serial cross-sectional surveys (May 2020, September 2020, February 2021) of Bay Area households with children to estimate age-structured daily contact rates for children and their adult household members. We examined changes in contact rates over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, including after vaccination of household members, and compared contact patterns by household demographics using generalized estimating equations clustered by household. RESULTS: We captured contact histories for 1,967 households on behalf of 2,674 children, comprising 15,087 non-household contacts over the three waves of data collection. Shortly after the start of shelter-in-place orders in May 2020, daily contact rates were higher among children from Hispanic families (1.52 more contacts per child per day; [95% CI: 1.14-2.04]), households whose parents were unable to work from home (1.82; [1.40-2.40]), and households with income < $150,000 (1.75; [1.33-2.33]), after adjusting for other demographic characteristics and household clustering. Between May and August 2020, non-household contacts of children increased by 145% (ages 5-12) and 172% (ages 13-17), despite few children returning to in-person instruction. Non-household contact rates among children were higher-by 1.75 [1.28-2.40] and 1.42 [0.89-2.24] contacts per child per day in 5-12 and 13-17 age groups, respectively, in households where at least one adult was vaccinated against COVID-19, compared to children's contact rates in unvaccinated households. CONCLUSIONS: Child contact rates rebounded despite schools remaining closed, as parents obtained childcare, children engaged in contact in non-school settings, and family members were vaccinated. The waning reductions observed in non-household contact rates of schoolchildren and their family members during a prolonged school closure suggests the strategy may be ineffective for long-term SARS-CoV-2 transmission mitigation. Reductions in age-assortative contacts were not as apparent amongst children from lower income households or households where adults could not work from home. Heterogeneous reductions in contact patterns raise concerning racial, ethnic and income-based inequities associated with long-term school closures as a COVID-19 mitigation strategy.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza, Human , Adolescent , Adult , COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Child , Child, Preschool , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Influenza, Human/epidemiology , Pandemics , SARS-CoV-2 , United States
6.
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
7.
Euro Surveill ; 26(8)2021 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1150673

ABSTRACT

BackgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, many countries have implemented physical distancing measures to reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2.AimTo measure the actual reduction of contacts when physical distancing measures are implemented.MethodsA cross-sectional survey was carried out in the Netherlands in 2016-17, in which participants reported the number and age of their contacts the previous day. The survey was repeated among a subsample of the participants in April 2020, after strict physical distancing measures were implemented, and in an extended sample in June 2020, after some measures were relaxed.ResultsThe average number of community contacts per day was reduced from 14.9 (interquartile range (IQR): 4-20) in the 2016-17 survey to 3.5 (IQR: 0-4) after strict physical distancing measures were implemented, and rebounded to 8.8 (IQR: 1-10) after some measures were relaxed. All age groups restricted their community contacts to at most 5, on average, after strict physical distancing measures were implemented. In children, the number of community contacts reverted to baseline levels after measures were eased, while individuals aged 70 years and older had less than half their baseline levels.ConclusionStrict physical distancing measures greatly reduced overall contact numbers, which likely contributed to curbing the first wave of the COVID-19 epidemic in the Netherlands. However, age groups reacted differently when measures were relaxed, with children reverting to normal contact numbers and elderly individuals maintaining restricted contact numbers. These findings offer guidance for age-targeted measures in future waves of the pandemic.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , Pandemics , Physical Distancing , Social Interaction , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Child , Child, Preschool , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Male , Middle Aged , Netherlands/epidemiology , Young Adult
8.
BMC Med ; 19(1): 52, 2021 02 19.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1090667

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: England's COVID-19 response transitioned from a national lockdown to localised interventions. In response to rising cases, these were supplemented by national restrictions on contacts (the Rule of Six), then 10 pm closing for bars and restaurants, and encouragement to work from home. These were quickly followed by a 3-tier system applying different restrictions in different localities. As cases continued to rise, a second national lockdown was declared. We used a national survey to quantify the impact of these restrictions on epidemiologically relevant contacts. METHODS: We compared paired measures on setting-specific contacts before and after each restriction started and tested for differences using paired permutation tests on the mean change in contacts and the proportion of individuals decreasing their contacts. RESULTS: Following the imposition of each measure, individuals tended to report fewer contacts than they had before. However, the magnitude of the changes was relatively small and variable. For instance, although early closure of bars and restaurants appeared to have no measurable effect on contacts, the work from home directive reduced mean daily work contacts by 0.99 (95% confidence interval CI] 0.03-1.94), and the Rule of Six reduced non-work and school contacts by a mean of 0.25 (0.01-0.5) per day. Whilst Tier 3 appeared to also reduce non-work and school contacts, the evidence for an effect of the lesser restrictions (Tiers 1 and 2) was much weaker. There may also have been some evidence of saturation of effects, with those who were in Tier 1 (least restrictive) reducing their contacts markedly when they entered lockdown, which was not reflected in similar changes in those who were already under tighter restrictions (Tiers 2 and 3). CONCLUSIONS: The imposition of various local and national measures in England during the summer and autumn of 2020 has gradually reduced contacts. However, these changes are smaller than the initial lockdown in March. This may partly be because many individuals were already starting from a lower number of contacts.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Physical Distancing , Quarantine/trends , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Child , Child, Preschool , England/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Infant , Infant, Newborn , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , Schools/trends , Workplace , Young Adult
9.
BMC Med ; 18(1): 124, 2020 05 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-186375

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: To mitigate and slow the spread of COVID-19, many countries have adopted unprecedented physical distancing policies, including the UK. We evaluate whether these measures might be sufficient to control the epidemic by estimating their impact on the reproduction number (R0, the average number of secondary cases generated per case). METHODS: We asked a representative sample of UK adults about their contact patterns on the previous day. The questionnaire was conducted online via email recruitment and documents the age and location of contacts and a measure of their intimacy (whether physical contact was made or not). In addition, we asked about adherence to different physical distancing measures. The first surveys were sent on Tuesday, 24 March, 1 day after a "lockdown" was implemented across the UK. We compared measured contact patterns during the "lockdown" to patterns of social contact made during a non-epidemic period. By comparing these, we estimated the change in reproduction number as a consequence of the physical distancing measures imposed. We used a meta-analysis of published estimates to inform our estimates of the reproduction number before interventions were put in place. RESULTS: We found a 74% reduction in the average daily number of contacts observed per participant (from 10.8 to 2.8). This would be sufficient to reduce R0 from 2.6 prior to lockdown to 0.62 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37-0.89) after the lockdown, based on all types of contact and 0.37 (95% CI = 0.22-0.53) for physical (skin to skin) contacts only. CONCLUSIONS: The physical distancing measures adopted by the UK public have substantially reduced contact levels and will likely lead to a substantial impact and a decline in cases in the coming weeks. However, this projected decline in incidence will not occur immediately as there are significant delays between infection, the onset of symptomatic disease, and hospitalisation, as well as further delays to these events being reported. Tracking behavioural change can give a more rapid assessment of the impact of physical distancing measures than routine epidemiological surveillance.


Subject(s)
Basic Reproduction Number , Coronavirus Infections , Epidemics/prevention & control , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Social Isolation , Activities of Daily Living , Adult , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Contact Tracing , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Coronavirus Infections/prevention & control , Coronavirus Infections/transmission , Health Policy , Humans , Incidence , Interpersonal Relations , Models, Theoretical , Pandemics/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , Pneumonia, Viral/prevention & control , Pneumonia, Viral/transmission , SARS-CoV-2 , Surveys and Questionnaires , United Kingdom/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL