Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Epidemiology and transmission of COVID-19 in cases and close contacts in Georgia in the first four months of the epidemic
Josephine G Walker; Irine Tskhomelidze; Adam Trickey; Vladimer Getia; Lia Gvinjilia; Paata Imnadze; Tinatin Kuchuloria; Aaron G Lim; Jack Stone; Sophia Surguladze; Maia Tsereteli; Khatuna Zakhashvili; Peter Vickerman; Amiran Gamkrelidze.
Affiliation
  • Josephine G Walker; University of Bristol
  • Irine Tskhomelidze; The Task Force for Global Health
  • Adam Trickey; University of Bristol
  • Vladimer Getia; National Center for Disease Control and Public Health
  • Lia Gvinjilia; The Task Force for Global Health
  • Paata Imnadze; National Center for Disease Control and Public Health
  • Tinatin Kuchuloria; The Task Force for Global Health
  • Aaron G Lim; University of Bristol
  • Jack Stone; University of Bristol
  • Sophia Surguladze; National Center for Disease Control and Public Health
  • Maia Tsereteli; National Center for Disease Control and Public Health
  • Khatuna Zakhashvili; National Center for Disease Control and Public Health
  • Peter Vickerman; University of Bristol
  • Amiran Gamkrelidze; National Center for Disease Control and Public Health
Preprint in English | medRxiv | ID: ppmedrxiv-21254082
ABSTRACT
BackgroundBetween February and June 2020, 917 COVID-19 cases and 14 COVID-19-related deaths were reported in Georgia. Early on, Georgia implemented non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI) including extensive contact tracing and restrictions on movement. AimTo characterize the demographics of those tested and infected with COVID-19 in Georgia; to evaluate factors associated with transmission between cases and their contacts; and to determine how transmission varied due to NPI up to 24 June 2020. MethodsWe use data gathered by the Georgian National Center for Disease Control on all polymerase chain reaction tests conducted (among symptomatic patients, through routine testing and contact tracing); hospitalization data for confirmed cases, and contact tracing data. We calculated the number of contacts per index case, the secondary attack rate (% contacts infected), and effective R number (new cases per index case), and used logistic regression to estimate how age, gender, and contact type affected transmission. ResultsMost contacts and transmission events were between family members. Contacts <40 years were less likely to be infected, while infected individuals >50 were more likely to die than younger patients. Contact tracing identified 917 index cases with mean 3.1 contacts tested per case, primarily family members. The overall secondary attack rate was 28% (95% confidence interval [CI] 26-29%) and effective R number was 0.87 (95%CI 0.81-0.93), peaking at 1.1 (95%CI 0.98-1.2) during the period with strongest restrictions. ConclusionGeorgia effectively controlled the COVID-19 epidemic in its early stages, although evidence does not suggest transmission was reduced during the strict lockdown period. Research in ContextO_ST_ABSEvidence before this studyC_ST_ABSWe searched PubMed and MedRxiv for papers reporting research using contact tracing data to evaluate the characteristics of the COVID-19 epidemic in any country. A number of analyses were identified from Asia, including China, Taiwan, Maldives, Thailand, South Korea, and India, but none from other regions other than one previous analysis conducted in Europe, focusing on the first two months of the COVID-19 epidemic in Cyprus. Studies evaluated number of contacts and different contact types, secondary attack rate, and effective R number. However, none of these studies compared characteristics between different time periods or under varied levels of non-pharmaceutical interventions or restrictions on social mixing. Added value of this studyIn this study, we use contact tracing data from Georgia from all cases identified in the first four months of the epidemic, as well as testing and hospitalization data, to evaluate the number and type of contacts, effective R number (new cases per index case), and secondary attack rate (proportion of contacts infected) in this population, and whether these measures changed before, during, and after the lockdown period. We also evaluated how the chance of transmission varied by type of index case and contact. Our results indicate that number of contacts remained relatively low throughout the study period, so although the secondary attack rate was relatively high (28%) compared to that seen in studies in Asia (10-15%), the effective R number was less than one overall, peaking at 1.1 (0.98-1.2) during the strictest lockdown period, with easing of restrictions corresponding to a lower effective R of 0.87 (0.77-0.97). Most transmission occurred between family members with transmission very low between co-workers, friends, neighbours, and medical personnel, indicating that the restrictions on social mixing were effective at keeping the epidemic under control during this period. Implications of all the available evidenceOur study presents the first analysis of the successful control of a COVID-19 epidemic in a European country, indicating that despite a high secondary attack rate, reduction in contacts outside the home, and a well-timed lockdown, were able to keep transmission under control.
License
cc_by_nc_nd
Full text: Available Collection: Preprints Database: medRxiv Type of study: Experimental_studies / Observational study / Review Language: English Year: 2021 Document type: Preprint
Full text: Available Collection: Preprints Database: medRxiv Type of study: Experimental_studies / Observational study / Review Language: English Year: 2021 Document type: Preprint
...