35
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Beware of the second wave of COVID-19

      discussion
      a , a
      Lancet (London, England)
      Elsevier Ltd.

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          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

          The outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), which began in Wuhan, China, in late 2019, has spread to 203 countries as of March 30, 2020, and has been officially declared a global pandemic. 1 With unprecedented public health interventions, local transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) appears now to have been contained in China. Multiple countries are now experiencing the first wave of the COVID-19 epidemic; thus, gaining an understanding of how these interventions prevented the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in China is urgent. In The Lancet, Kathy Leung and colleagues 2 report their assessment of the transmissibility and severity of COVID-19 during the first wave in four cities and ten provinces in China outside Hubei. The study estimated the instantaneous reproduction number in the selected locations decreased substantially after non-pharmaceutical control measures were implemented on Jan 23, 2020, and has since remained lower than 1. The transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in these locations was mainly driven by imported cases from Hubei until late January, which is, to some extent, similar to the transmission in January in several countries. The epidemics in Chinese provinces outside Hubei were believed to be driven by local transmission dynamics after Jan 31; 3 therefore, the findings of Leung and colleagues' study highlight the fact that the package of non-pharmaceutical interventions in China has the ability to contain transmission—not only imported cases, but also local transmission. The epidemic is accelerating rapidly in multiple countries, indicating shortfalls in preparedness. Given that multiple countries imposed travel restrictions against China in late January, there is a need to model whether earlier implementation of interventions such as social distancing, population behavioural change, and contact tracing would have been able to contain or mitigate the epidemic. Leung and colleagues also modelled the potential adverse consequences of premature relaxation of interventions, and found that such a decision might lead to transmissibility exceeding 1 again—ie, a second wave of infections. The finding is critical to governments globally, because it warns against premature relaxation of strict interventions. However, the effect of each intervention, or which one was the most effective in containing the spread of the virus, was not addressed in the study. While interventions to control the spread of SARS-CoV-2 are in place, countries will need to work toward returning to normalcy; thus, knowledge of the effect of each intervention is urgently required. Air travel data were used to model the effect of travel restrictions on delaying overall epidemic progression, and were found to have a marked effect at the international scale, but only a 3–5 day delay within China. 4 A study 5 focused on the effects of extending or relaxing physical distancing control measures in Wuhan has suggested that if the measures are gradually relaxed in March, a second wave of cases might occur in the northern hemisphere mid-summer. Country-specific models of the effects of travel restrictions and social distancing, as well as the alternative strategies after the relaxation of these interventions, such as the use of face masks, temperature checks, and contact tracing, are now needed. Case fatality rate (CFR) is one of the important unknowns of COVID-19. Leung and colleagues estimated the confirmed CFR (cCFR) outside Hubei was 0·98% (95% CI 0·82–1·16), which was consistent with the report from the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention. 6 Since the epidemics in the studied locations did not overwhelm the health-care capacities, the data on the number of confirmed cases are believed to be reliable. Leung and colleagues also found the cCFR was correlated with provincial per capita gross domestic product and the availability of hospital beds per 10 000. In Wuhan, the CFR was up to 5·08% by March 28, 2020. 7 The remarkable difference in the CFRa between these locations and Wuhan might be attributed to the difference in the degrees of health-care capacity. Therefore, consideration should be given to the variations in health-care capacity when implementing interventions. While the epidemic is growing exponentially, the health-care system will face severe burdens. Governments should act and prepare immediately to ensure that the health-care system has adequate labour, resources, and facilities to minimise the mortality risk of COVID-19. © 2020 Tingshu Wang/Reuters 2020 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.

          Related collections

          Most cited references4

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          The effect of travel restrictions on the spread of the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak

          Motivated by the rapid spread of COVID-19 in Mainland China, we use a global metapopulation disease transmission model to project the impact of travel limitations on the national and international spread of the epidemic. The model is calibrated based on internationally reported cases, and shows that at the start of the travel ban from Wuhan on 23 January 2020, most Chinese cities had already received many infected travelers. The travel quarantine of Wuhan delayed the overall epidemic progression by only 3 to 5 days in Mainland China, but has a more marked effect at the international scale, where case importations were reduced by nearly 80% until mid February. Modeling results also indicate that sustained 90% travel restrictions to and from Mainland China only modestly affect the epidemic trajectory unless combined with a 50% or higher reduction of transmission in the community.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            The effect of human mobility and control measures on the COVID-19 epidemic in China

            The ongoing COVID-19 outbreak expanded rapidly throughout China. Major behavioral, clinical, and state interventions have been undertaken to mitigate the epidemic and prevent the persistence of the virus in human populations in China and worldwide. It remains unclear how these unprecedented interventions, including travel restrictions, affected COVID-19 spread in China. We use real-time mobility data from Wuhan and detailed case data including travel history to elucidate the role of case importation on transmission in cities across China and ascertain the impact of control measures. Early on, the spatial distribution of COVID-19 cases in China was explained well by human mobility data. Following the implementation of control measures, this correlation dropped and growth rates became negative in most locations, although shifts in the demographics of reported cases were still indicative of local chains of transmission outside Wuhan. This study shows that the drastic control measures implemented in China substantially mitigated the spread of COVID-19.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The effect of control strategies to reduce social mixing on outcomes of the COVID-19 epidemic in Wuhan, China: a modelling study

              Summary Background In December, 2019, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), a novel coronavirus, emerged in Wuhan, China. Since then, the city of Wuhan has taken unprecedented measures in response to the outbreak, including extended school and workplace closures. We aimed to estimate the effects of physical distancing measures on the progression of the COVID-19 epidemic, hoping to provide some insights for the rest of the world. Methods To examine how changes in population mixing have affected outbreak progression in Wuhan, we used synthetic location-specific contact patterns in Wuhan and adapted these in the presence of school closures, extended workplace closures, and a reduction in mixing in the general community. Using these matrices and the latest estimates of the epidemiological parameters of the Wuhan outbreak, we simulated the ongoing trajectory of an outbreak in Wuhan using an age-structured susceptible-exposed-infected-removed (SEIR) model for several physical distancing measures. We fitted the latest estimates of epidemic parameters from a transmission model to data on local and internationally exported cases from Wuhan in an age-structured epidemic framework and investigated the age distribution of cases. We also simulated lifting of the control measures by allowing people to return to work in a phased-in way and looked at the effects of returning to work at different stages of the underlying outbreak (at the beginning of March or April). Findings Our projections show that physical distancing measures were most effective if the staggered return to work was at the beginning of April; this reduced the median number of infections by more than 92% (IQR 66–97) and 24% (13–90) in mid-2020 and end-2020, respectively. There are benefits to sustaining these measures until April in terms of delaying and reducing the height of the peak, median epidemic size at end-2020, and affording health-care systems more time to expand and respond. However, the modelled effects of physical distancing measures vary by the duration of infectiousness and the role school children have in the epidemic. Interpretation Restrictions on activities in Wuhan, if maintained until April, would probably help to delay the epidemic peak. Our projections suggest that premature and sudden lifting of interventions could lead to an earlier secondary peak, which could be flattened by relaxing the interventions gradually. However, there are limitations to our analysis, including large uncertainties around estimates of R 0 and the duration of infectiousness. Funding Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, National Institute for Health Research, Wellcome Trust, and Health Data Research UK.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Lancet
                Lancet
                Lancet (London, England)
                Elsevier Ltd.
                0140-6736
                1474-547X
                8 April 2020
                25 April-1 May 2020
                8 April 2020
                : 395
                : 10233
                : 1321-1322
                Affiliations
                [a ]Key Laboratory of Environment and Health, Ministry of Education and Ministry of Environmental Protection, and State Key Laboratory of Environmental Health (Incubating), School of Public Health, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, Hubei, China
                Article
                S0140-6736(20)30845-X
                10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30845-X
                7194658
                32277876
                b86a19e2-8b61-41a0-ad17-07860f0f3965
                © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

                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
                Categories
                Article

                Medicine
                Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article