15
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      The impact of the lockdown and the re-opening of schools and day cares on the epidemiology of SARS-CoV-2 and other respiratory infections in children – A nationwide register study in Finland

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Nationwide restrictions started in Finland in March to prevent the spread of COVID-19, leading to school and day care closures. The aim of this study is to describe the effect of closures and re-openings on the respiratory pathogen epidemiology.

          Methods

          Laboratory-confirmed cases of SARS-CoV-2; respiratory syncytial virus (RSV); influenza (A & B); parainfluenza-, adeno-, and rhinoviruses; Mycoplasma pneumoniae; and Streptococcus pneumoniae in children were collected from the National Infectious Disease Register over the period of 2017–2020. Weekly incidences (weeks 1 to 35) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated per 100 000 children in 2020 and compared by incidence rate ratios (IRRs) to corresponding periods in 2017−2019.

          Findings

          The lockdown had immediate impact on the incidences of respiratory pathogens except SARS-CoV-2. Week after the lockdown began IRR was 0•3 (CI 0•3–0•4) and next week the IRR was 0•1 (0•1–0•2). The incidence of SARS-CoV-2 started to decline eight weeks after the lockdown began. The highest recorded weekly incidence of SARS-CoV-2 was 7•2/100 000 children. The effect of the lockdown lasted until late summer. Rhinovirus and SARS-CoV-2 began to increase before the schools or day cares opened in August. The re-opening of schools seemed to have no impact on the incidence of any pathogen.

          Interpretation

          Our results suggest that general social distancing, including school and day care closures, played a crucial role in reducing infections, and the effect lasted for several weeks. The re-opening of schools and day care centres seems to have had no immediate impact on the incidences of any respiratory pathogens.

          Funding

          This study had no funding source.

          Related collections

          Most cited references17

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Impact assessment of non-pharmaceutical interventions against coronavirus disease 2019 and influenza in Hong Kong: an observational study

          Summary Background A range of public health measures have been implemented to suppress local transmission of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Hong Kong. We examined the effect of these interventions and behavioural changes of the public on the incidence of COVID-19, as well as on influenza virus infections, which might share some aspects of transmission dynamics with COVID-19. Methods We analysed data on laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases, influenza surveillance data in outpatients of all ages, and influenza hospitalisations in children. We estimated the daily effective reproduction number (R t) for COVID-19 and influenza A H1N1 to estimate changes in transmissibility over time. Attitudes towards COVID-19 and changes in population behaviours were reviewed through three telephone surveys done on Jan 20–23, Feb 11–14, and March 10–13, 2020. Findings COVID-19 transmissibility measured by R t has remained at approximately 1 for 8 weeks in Hong Kong. Influenza transmission declined substantially after the implementation of social distancing measures and changes in population behaviours in late January, with a 44% (95% CI 34–53%) reduction in transmissibility in the community, from an estimated R t of 1·28 (95% CI 1·26–1·30) before the start of the school closures to 0·72 (0·70–0·74) during the closure weeks. Similarly, a 33% (24–43%) reduction in transmissibility was seen based on paediatric hospitalisation rates, from an R t of 1·10 (1·06–1·12) before the start of the school closures to 0·73 (0·68–0·77) after school closures. Among respondents to the surveys, 74·5%, 97·5%, and 98·8% reported wearing masks when going out, and 61·3%, 90·2%, and 85·1% reported avoiding crowded places in surveys 1 (n=1008), 2 (n=1000), and 3 (n=1005), respectively. Interpretation Our study shows that non-pharmaceutical interventions (including border restrictions, quarantine and isolation, distancing, and changes in population behaviour) were associated with reduced transmission of COVID-19 in Hong Kong, and are also likely to have substantially reduced influenza transmission in early February, 2020. Funding Health and Medical Research Fund, Hong Kong.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Decreased Influenza Activity During the COVID-19 Pandemic — United States, Australia, Chile, and South Africa, 2020

            After recognition of widespread community transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), by mid- to late February 2020, indicators of influenza activity began to decline in the Northern Hemisphere. These changes were attributed to both artifactual changes related to declines in routine health seeking for respiratory illness as well as real changes in influenza virus circulation because of widespread implementation of measures to mitigate transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Data from clinical laboratories in the United States indicated a 61% decrease in the number of specimens submitted (from a median of 49,696 per week during September 29, 2019–February 29, 2020, to 19,537 during March 1–May 16, 2020) and a 98% decrease in influenza activity as measured by percentage of submitted specimens testing positive (from a median of 19.34% to 0.33%). Interseasonal (i.e., summer) circulation of influenza in the United States (May 17–August 8, 2020) is currently at historical lows (median = 0.20% tests positive in 2020 versus 2.35% in 2019, 1.04% in 2018, and 2.36% in 2017). Influenza data reported to the World Health Organization’s (WHO’s) FluNet platform from three Southern Hemisphere countries that serve as robust sentinel sites for influenza from Oceania (Australia), South America (Chile), and Southern Africa (South Africa) showed very low influenza activity during June–August 2020, the months that constitute the typical Southern Hemisphere influenza season. In countries or jurisdictions where extensive community mitigation measures are maintained (e.g., face masks, social distancing, school closures, and teleworking), those locations might have little influenza circulation during the upcoming 2020–21 Northern Hemisphere influenza season. The use of community mitigation measures for the COVID-19 pandemic, plus influenza vaccination, are likely to be effective in reducing the incidence and impact of influenza, and some of these mitigation measures could have a role in preventing influenza in future seasons. However, given the novelty of the COVID-19 pandemic and the uncertainty of continued community mitigation measures, it is important to plan for seasonal influenza circulation in the United States this fall and winter. Influenza vaccination of all persons aged ≥6 months remains the best method for influenza prevention and is especially important this season when SARS-CoV-2 and influenza virus might cocirculate ( 1 ). Data from approximately 300 U.S. clinical laboratories located throughout all 50 states, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the District of Columbia that participate in virologic surveillance for influenza through either the U.S. WHO Collaborating Laboratories System or the National Respiratory and Enteric Virus Surveillance System* were used for this analysis. Clinical laboratories primarily test respiratory specimens for diagnostic purposes, and data from these laboratories provide useful information on the timing and intensity of influenza activity. The median number of specimens tested per week and the median percentage of samples testing positive for influenza during September 29, 2019–February 29, 2020 (surveillance weeks 40–9, the period before the March 1, 2020 declaration of a national emergency related to COVID-19 † ) were compared with those tested during March 1–May 16, 2020 (weeks 10–20 after the declaration); data from three previous influenza seasons are presented as a comparison. To assess influenza virus activity in the Southern Hemisphere, influenza laboratory data from clinical and surveillance platforms reported from Australia, Chile, and South Africa to WHO’s FluNet § platform were analyzed. For each country, the percentage of samples testing positive for influenza for April–July (weeks 14–31) for four seasons (2017–2020) are presented. Selected measures implemented to respond to COVID-19 in these countries were ascertained from government websites. All data used were in the public domain. In the United States, influenza activity (measured by percentage of respiratory specimens submitted for influenza testing that yielded positive results) began to increase in early November 2019, and >20% of specimens were positive during December 15, 2019–March 7, 2020 (weeks 51–10), after which activity declined sharply (Figure 1). Percent positivity peaked on week 6 at 30.25% and decreased 14.90% by week 9, compared with an 89.77% decrease during weeks 10–13. By the week of March 22, 2020 (week 13), when the number of samples tested remained very high, percent positivity dropped to 2.3%, and since the week of April 5, 2020 (week 15), has remained 20% to 2.3% and has remained at historically low interseasonal levels (0.2% versus 1–2%). Data from Southern Hemisphere countries also indicate little influenza activity. What are the implications for public health practice? Interventions aimed against SARS-CoV-2 transmission, plus influenza vaccination, could substantially reduce influenza incidence and impact in the 2020–21 Northern Hemisphere season. Some mitigation measures might have a role in reducing transmission in future influenza seasons.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The temporal association of introducing and lifting non-pharmaceutical interventions with the time-varying reproduction number ( R ) of SARS-CoV-2: a modelling study across 131 countries

              Background Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) were implemented by many countries to reduce the transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causal agent of COVID-19. A resurgence in COVID-19 cases has been reported in some countries that lifted some of these NPIs. We aimed to understand the association of introducing and lifting NPIs with the level of transmission of SARS-CoV-2, as measured by the time-varying reproduction number (R), from a broad perspective across 131 countries. Methods In this modelling study, we linked data on daily country-level estimates of R from the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (London, UK) with data on country-specific policies on NPIs from the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker, available between Jan 1 and July 20, 2020. We defined a phase as a time period when all NPIs remained the same, and we divided the timeline of each country into individual phases based on the status of NPIs. We calculated the R ratio as the ratio between the daily R of each phase and the R from the last day of the previous phase (ie, before the NPI status changed) as a measure of the association between NPI status and transmission of SARS-CoV-2. We then modelled the R ratio using a log-linear regression with introduction and relaxation of each NPI as independent variables for each day of the first 28 days after the change in the corresponding NPI. In an ad-hoc analysis, we estimated the effect of reintroducing multiple NPIs with the greatest effects, and in the observed sequence, to tackle the possible resurgence of SARS-CoV-2. Findings 790 phases from 131 countries were included in the analysis. A decreasing trend over time in the R ratio was found following the introduction of school closure, workplace closure, public events ban, requirements to stay at home, and internal movement limits; the reduction in R ranged from 3% to 24% on day 28 following the introduction compared with the last day before introduction, although the reduction was significant only for public events ban (R ratio 0·76, 95% CI 0·58–1·00); for all other NPIs, the upper bound of the 95% CI was above 1. An increasing trend over time in the R ratio was found following the relaxation of school closure, bans on public events, bans on public gatherings of more than ten people, requirements to stay at home, and internal movement limits; the increase in R ranged from 11% to 25% on day 28 following the relaxation compared with the last day before relaxation, although the increase was significant only for school reopening (R ratio 1·24, 95% CI 1·00–1·52) and lifting bans on public gatherings of more than ten people (1·25, 1·03–1·51); for all other NPIs, the lower bound of the 95% CI was below 1. It took a median of 8 days (IQR 6–9) following the introduction of an NPI to observe 60% of the maximum reduction in R and even longer (17 days [14–20]) following relaxation to observe 60% of the maximum increase in R. In response to a possible resurgence of COVID-19, a control strategy of banning public events and public gatherings of more than ten people was estimated to reduce R, with an R ratio of 0·71 (95% CI 0·55–0·93) on day 28, decreasing to 0·62 (0·47–0·82) on day 28 if measures to close workplaces were added, 0·58 (0·41–0·81) if measures to close workplaces and internal movement restrictions were added, and 0·48 (0·32–0·71) if measures to close workplaces, internal movement restrictions, and requirements to stay at home were added. Interpretation Individual NPIs, including school closure, workplace closure, public events ban, ban on gatherings of more than ten people, requirements to stay at home, and internal movement limits, are associated with reduced transmission of SARS-CoV-2, but the effect of introducing and lifting these NPIs is delayed by 1–3 weeks, with this delay being longer when lifting NPIs. These findings provide additional evidence that can inform policy-maker decisions on the timing of introducing and lifting different NPIs, although R should be interpreted in the context of its known limitations. Funding Wellcome Trust Institutional Strategic Support Fund and Data-Driven Innovation initiative.

                Author and article information

                Journal
                EClinicalMedicine
                EClinicalMedicine
                EClinicalMedicine
                The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.
                2589-5370
                29 March 2021
                April 2021
                29 March 2021
                : 34
                : 100807
                Affiliations
                [a ]School of Medicine, University of Eastern Finland, Yliopistonranta 1, PL 1627, 70211 Kuopio, Finland
                [b ]Department of Pediatrics, Mikkeli Central Hospital, Porrassalmenkatu 35-37, 50100 Mikkeli, Finland
                [c ]Finnish Institute of Health and Welfare, FinnMedi 1, Biokatu 6, 33540 Tampere, Finland
                [d ]Faculty of Social Sciences, Tampere University, Arvo Ylpön Katu 34, 33520 Tampere, Finland
                [e ]Department of Pediatrics, Kuopio University Hospital, Puijonlaaksontie 2, 70210 Kuopio, Finland
                [f ]University of Oulu, PEDEGO Research Unit, Kajaanintie 50, 90220 Oulu, Finland
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author.
                Article
                S2589-5370(21)00087-0 100807
                10.1016/j.eclinm.2021.100807
                8007090
                33817612
                3c077365-bdcc-4720-8cf5-6ad3917bb386
                © 2021 The Author(s)

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                : 23 February 2021
                : 5 March 2021
                : 8 March 2021
                Categories
                Research Paper

                covid-19,public health,social distancing,register study
                covid-19, public health, social distancing, register study

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log