Clinical course and care requirements during the 2020 COVID-19 epidemic in South Australia.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Haustead D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8206960 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jun
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Clinical course and care requirements during the 2020 COVID-19 epidemic in South Australia.
Haustead Daniel D Toh Dylan J DJ Reddi Benjamin B Kirkpatrick Emily E Rowe Emily E Outhwaite Pamela P Harnack Elizabett E Cusack Michael M Brooks Megan M
The Medical journal of Australia 20210429 10
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundPolicy responses to COVID-19 in Victoria, Australia over 2020-2021 have been supported by evidence generated through mathematical modelling. This study describes the design, key findings, and process for policy translation of a series of modelling studies conducted for the Victorian Department of Health COVID-19 response team during this period.MethodsAn agent-based model, Covasim, was used to simulate the impact of policy interventions on COVID-19 outbreaks and epidemic waves. The model was continually adapted to enable scenario analysis of settings or policies being considered at the time (e.g. elimination of community transmission versus disease control). Model scenarios were co-designed with government, to fill evidence gaps prior to key decisions.ResultsUnderstanding outbreak risk following incursions was critical to eliminating community COVID-19 transmission. Analyses showed risk depended on whether the first detected case was the index case, a primary contact of the index case, or a 'mystery case'. There were benefits of early lockdown on first case detection and gradual easing of restrictions to minimise resurgence risk from undetected cases. As vaccination coverage increased and the focus shifted to controlling rather than eliminating community transmission, understanding health system demand was critical. Analyses showed that vaccines alone could not protect health systems and need to be complemented with other public health measures.ConclusionsModel evidence offered the greatest value when decisions needed to be made pre-emptively, or for questions that could not be answered with empiric data and data analysis alone. Co-designing scenarios with policy-makers ensured relevance and increased policy translation.
| S-EPMC10219801 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo develop a regional model of COVID-19 dynamics for use in estimating the number of infections, deaths and required acute and intensive care (IC) beds using the South West England (SW) as an example case.DesignOpen-source age-structured variant of a susceptible-exposed-infectious-recovered compartmental mathematical model. Latin hypercube sampling and maximum likelihood estimation were used to calibrate to cumulative cases and cumulative deaths.SettingSW at a time considered early in the pandemic, where National Health Service authorities required evidence to guide localised planning and support decision-making.ParticipantsPublicly available data on patients with COVID-19.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe expected numbers of infected cases, deaths due to COVID-19 infection, patient occupancy of acute and IC beds and the reproduction ('R') number over time.ResultsSW model projections indicate that, as of 11 May 2020 (when 'lockdown' measures were eased), 5793 (95% credible interval (CrI) 2003 to 12 051) individuals were still infectious (0.10% of the total SW population, 95% CrI 0.04% to 0.22%), and a total of 189 048 (95% CrI 141 580 to 277 955) had been infected with the virus (either asymptomatically or symptomatically), but recovered, which is 3.4% (95% CrI 2.5% to 5.0%) of the SW population. The total number of patients in acute and IC beds in the SW on 11 May 2020 was predicted to be 701 (95% CrI 169 to 1543) and 110 (95% CrI 8 to 464), respectively. The R value in SW was predicted to be 2.6 (95% CrI 2.0 to 3.2) prior to any interventions, with social distancing reducing this to 2.3 (95% CrI 1.8 to 2.9) and lockdown/school closures further reducing the R value to 0.6 (95% CrI 0.5 to 0.7).ConclusionsThe developed model has proved a valuable asset for regional healthcare services. The model will be used further in the SW as the pandemic evolves, and-as open-source software-is portable to healthcare systems in other geographies.
| S-EPMC7797241 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background To prevent future outbreaks of COVID-19, Australia is pursuing a mass-vaccination approach in which a targeted group of the population comprising healthcare workers, aged-care residents and other individuals at increased risk of exposure will receive a highly effective priority vaccine. The rest of the population will instead have access to a less effective vaccine. Methods We apply a large-scale agent-based model of COVID-19 in Australia to investigate the possible implications of this hybrid approach to mass-vaccination. The model is calibrated to recent epidemiological and demographic data available in Australia, and accounts for several components of vaccine efficacy. Findings Within a feasible range of vaccine efficacy values, our model supports the assertion that complete herd immunity due to vaccination is not likely in the Australian context. For realistic scenarios in which herd immunity is not achieved, we simulate the effects of mass-vaccination on epidemic growth rate, and investigate the requirements of lockdown measures applied to curb subsequent outbreaks. In our simulations, Australia's vaccination strategy can feasibly reduce required lockdown intensity and initial epidemic growth rate by 43% and 52%, respectively. The severity of epidemics, as measured by the peak number of daily new cases, decreases by up to two orders of magnitude under plausible mass-vaccination and lockdown strategies. Interpretation The study presents a strong argument for a large-scale vaccination campaign in Australia, which would substantially reduce both the intensity of future outbreaks and the stringency of non-pharmaceutical interventions required for their suppression. Funding Australian Research Council; National Health and Medical Research Council.
| S-EPMC8323620 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7258632 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSouth Africa experienced four waves of SARS-CoV-2 infection, dominated by Wuhan-Hu, Beta, Delta, and Omicron (BA.1/BA.2). We describe the trends in SARS-CoV-2 testing, cases, admissions, and deaths among children and adolescents in South Africa over successive waves.MethodsWe analyzed national SARS-CoV-2 testing, case, and admissions data from March 2020 to February 2022 and estimated cumulative rates by age group for each endpoint. The severity in the third versus the fourth wave was assessed using multivariable logistic regression.ResultsIndividuals ≤18 years comprised 35% (21,008,060/60,142,978) of the population but only 12% (424,394/3,593,644) of cases and 6% (26,176/451,753) of admissions. Among individuals ≤18 years, infants had the highest admission (505/100,000) rates. Testing, case, and admission rates generally increased successively in the second (Beta) and third (Delta) waves among all age groups. In the fourth (Omicron BA.1/BA.2) wave, the case rate dropped among individuals ≥1 year but increased among those <1 year. Weekly admission rates for children <1 year (169/100,000) exceeded rates in adults (124/100,000) in the fourth wave. The odds of severe COVID-19 in all admitted cases were lower in the fourth wave versus the third wave in each age group, but they were twice as high in admitted cases with at least one comorbidity than those without.ConclusionsThe admission rate for children <5 years was higher in the fourth wave than in previous waves, but the overall outcomes were less severe. However, children with at least one comorbidity had increased odds of severe disease, warranting consideration of prioritizing this group for vaccination.
| S-EPMC10112681 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Reported COVID-19 cases and deaths provide a delayed and incomplete picture of SARS-CoV-2 infections in the United States (US). Accurate estimates of both the timing and magnitude of infections are needed to characterize viral transmission dynamics and better understand COVID-19 disease burden. We estimated time trends in SARS-CoV-2 transmission and other COVID-19 outcomes for every county in the US, from the first reported COVID-19 case in January 13, 2020 through January 1, 2021. To do so we employed a Bayesian modeling approach that explicitly accounts for reporting delays and variation in case ascertainment, and generates daily estimates of incident SARS-CoV-2 infections on the basis of reported COVID-19 cases and deaths. The model is freely available as the covidestim R package. Nationally, we estimated there had been 49 million symptomatic COVID-19 cases and 404,214 COVID-19 deaths by the end of 2020, and that 28% of the US population had been infected. There was county-level variability in the timing and magnitude of incidence, with local epidemiological trends differing substantially from state or regional averages, leading to large differences in the estimated proportion of the population infected by the end of 2020. Our estimates of true COVID-19 related deaths are consistent with independent estimates of excess mortality, and our estimated trends in cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection are consistent with trends in seroprevalence estimates from available antibody testing studies. Reconstructing the underlying incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections across US counties allows for a more granular understanding of disease trends and the potential impact of epidemiological drivers.
| S-EPMC9467347 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Reported COVID-19 cases and deaths provide a delayed and incomplete picture of SARS-CoV-2 infections in the United States (US). Accurate estimates of both the timing and magnitude of infections are needed to characterize viral transmission dynamics and better understand COVID-19 disease burden. We estimated time trends in SARS-CoV-2 transmission and other COVID-19 outcomes for every county in the US, from the first reported COVID-19 case in January 13, 2020 through January 1, 2021. To do so we employed a Bayesian modeling approach that explicitly accounts for reporting delays and variation in case ascertainment, and generates daily estimates of incident SARS-CoV-2 infections on the basis of reported COVID-19 cases and deaths. The model is freely available as the covidestim R package. Nationally, we estimated there had been 49 million symptomatic COVID-19 cases and 400,718 COVID-19 deaths by the end of 2020, and that 27% of the US population had been infected. The results also demonstrate wide county-level variability in the timing and magnitude of incidence, with local epidemiological trends differing substantially from state or regional averages, leading to large differences in the estimated proportion of the population infected by the end of 2020. Our estimates of true COVID-19 related deaths are consistent with independent estimates of excess mortality, and our estimated trends in cumulative incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection are consistent with trends in seroprevalence estimates from available antibody testing studies. Reconstructing the underlying incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infections across US counties allows for a more granular understanding of disease trends and the potential impact of epidemiological drivers.
| S-EPMC8043480 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFollowing the first detection of SARS-CoV-2 in passengers arriving from Europe on 19 March 2020, Madagascar took several mitigation measures to limit the spread of the virus in the country.MethodsNasopharyngeal and/or oropharyngeal swabs were collected from travellers to Madagascar, suspected SARS-CoV-2 cases and contact of confirmed cases. Swabs were tested at the national reference laboratory using real-time RT-PCR. Data collected from patients were entered in an electronic database for subsequent statistical analysis. All distribution of laboratory-confirmed cases were mapped, and six genomes of viruses were fully sequenced.ResultsOverall, 26,415 individuals were tested for SARS-CoV-2 between 18 March and 18 September 2020, of whom 21.0% (5,553/26,145) returned positive. Among laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2-positive patients, the median age was 39 years (IQR: 28-52), and 56.6% (3,311/5,553) were asymptomatic at the time of sampling. The probability of testing positive increased with age with the highest adjusted odds ratio of 2.2 [95% CI: 1.9-2.5] for individuals aged 49 years and more. Viral strains sequenced belong to clades 19A, 20A and 20B indicative of several independent introduction of viruses.ConclusionsOur study describes the first wave of the COVID-19 in Madagascar. Despite early strategies in place Madagascar could not avoid the introduction and spread of the virus. More studies are needed to estimate the true burden of disease and make public health recommendations for a better preparation to another wave.
| S-EPMC8013501 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAged-care facilities (ACF's) provide unique challenges when implementing infection control methods for respiratory outbreaks such as COVID-19. Research on this highly vulnerable setting is lacking and there was no national reporting data of COVID-19 cases in ACFs in Australia early in the pandemic. We aimed to estimate the burden of aged-care worker (ACW) infections and outbreaks of COVID-19 in Australian aged-care.MethodsA line list of publicly available aged-care related COVID-19 reported cases from January 25 to June 10, 2020 was created and was enhanced by matching data extracted from media reports of aged-care related COVID-19 relevant outbreaks and reports. Rate ratios (RR) were used to predict risk of infection in ACW and aged-care residents, and were calculated independently, by comparing overall cases to ACW and aged-care residents' cases.ResultsA total of 14 ACFs with COVID-19 cases were recorded by June 2020 nationwide, with a high case fatality rate (CFR) of 50% (n = 34) and 100% (n = 3) seen in two ACFs. Analysis on the resident risk found that the COVID-19 risk is 1.27 times higher (unadjusted RR 1.27 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00 to1.61; P = 0.047) as compared with the risk of infection in the general population. In over 60% of cases identified in ACFs, the source of infection in the index case was unknown. A total of 28 deaths associated within ACFs were reported, accounting for 54.9% of total deaths in New South Wales and 26.9% of total deaths in Australia.ConclusionsThis high-risk population requires additional prevention and control measures, such as routine testing of all staff and patients regardless of symptoms. Prompt isolation and quarantine as soon as a case is confirmed within a facility is essential.
| S-EPMC8983895 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn the early stage of COVID-19 epidemic, the Chinese mainland once effectively controlled the epidemic, but COVID-19 eventually spread faster and faster in the world. The purpose of this study is to clarify the differences in the epidemic data of COVID-19 in different areas and phases in Chinese mainland in 2020, and to analyze the possible factors affecting the occurrence and development of the epidemic.MethodsWe divided the Chinese mainland into areas I, I and III, and divided the epidemic process into phases I to IV: limited cases, accelerated increase, decelerated increase and containment phases. We also combined phases II and III as outbreak phase. The epidemic data included the duration of different phases, the numbers of confirmed cases, asymptomatic infections, and the proportion of imported cases from abroad.ResultsIn area I, II and III, only area I has a Phase I, and the Phase II and III of area I are longer. In Phase IV, there is a 17-day case clearing period in area I, while that in area II and III are 2 and 0 days, respectively. In phase III or the whole outbreak phase, the average daily increase of confirmed cases in area I was higher than that in areas II and III (P = 0.009 and P = 0.001 in phase III; P = 0.034 and P = 0.002 in the whole outbreak phase), and the average daily in-hospital cases were most in area I and least in area III (P = 0.000, P = 0.000, and P = 0.000 in phase III; P = 0.000, P = 0.000, and P = 0.009 in the whole outbreak phase). The average number of daily in-hospital COVID-19 cases in phase III was more than that in phase II in each area (P = 0.000, P = 0.000, and P = 0.001). In phase IV, from March 18, 2020 to January 1, 2021, the increase of confirmed cases in area III was higher than areas I and II (both P = 0.000), and the imported cases from abroad in Chinese mainland accounted for more than 55-61%. From June 16 to July 2, 2020, the number of new asymptomatic infections in area III was higher than that in area II (P = 0.000), while there was zero in area I. From July 3, 2020 to January 1, 2021, the increased COVID-19 cases in area III were 3534, while only 14 and 0, respectively, in areas I and II.ConclusionsThe worst epidemic areas in Chinese mainland before March 18, 2020 and after June 15, 2020 were area I and area III, respectively, and area III had become the main battlefield for Chinese mainland to fight against imported epidemic since March 18, 2020. In Wuhan, human COVID-19 infection might occur before December 8, 2019, while the outbreak might occur before January 16 or even 10, 2020. Insufficient understanding of COVID-19 hindered the implementation of early effective isolation measures, leading to COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan, and strict isolation measures were effective in controlling the epidemic. The import of foreign COVID-19 cases has made it difficult to control the epidemic of area III. When humans are once again faced with potentially infectious new diseases, it is appropriate to first and foremost take strict quarantine measures as soon as possible, and mutual cooperation between regions should be explored to combat the epidemic.
| S-EPMC10117903 | biostudies-literature