Feasibility of Controlling COVID-19 Outbreaks in the UK by Rolling Interventions

Background: Recent outbreak of a novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in China has led a rapid global spread around the world. For controlling COVID-19 outbreaks, many countries have implemented two non-pharmaceutical interventions: suppression like immediate lockdowns in cities at epicentre of outbreak; or mitigation that slows down but not stopping epidemic for reducing peak healthcare demand. Both interventions have apparent pros and cons; the effectiveness of any one intervention in isolation is limited. We aimed to conduct a feasibility study for robustly estimating the number and distribution of infections, growth of deaths, peaks and lengths of COVID-19 breakouts by taking multiple pharmaceutical interventions in London and the UK, accounting for reduction of healthcare demand. Methods: We developed a model to attempt to infer the impact of mitigation, suppression and multiple rolling interventions for controlling COVID-19 outbreaks in London and the UK. Our model assumed that each intervention has equivalent effect on the reproduction number R across countries and over time; where its intensity was presented by average-number contacts with susceptible individuals as infectious individuals; early immediate intensive intervention led to increased health need and social anxiety. We considered two important features: direct link between Exposed and Recovered population, and practical healthcare demand by separation of infections into mild and critical cases. Our model was fitted and calibrated with data on cases of COVID-19 in Wuhan and Hubei to estimate how suppression intervention impacted on the number and distribution of infections, growth of deaths over time during January 2020, and April 2020. We combined the calibrated model with data on the cases of COVID-19 in London, the UK (non-London) and the UK during February 2020 and March 2020 to estimate the number and distribution of infections, growth of deaths, and healthcare demand by using multiple interventions. Findings: We estimated given that multiple interventions with an intensity range from 3 to 15, one optimal strategy was to take suppression with intensity 3 in London from 23rd March for 100 days, and 3 weeks rolling intervention with intensity between 3 and 5 in non-London regions. In this scenario, the total infections and deaths in the UK were limited to 2.43 million and 33.8 thousand; the peak time of healthcare demand was due to the 65th day (April 11th), where it needs hospital beds for 25.3 thousand severe and critical cases. If we took a simultaneous 3 weeks rolling intervention with intensity between 3 and 5 in all regions of the UK, the total infections and deaths increased slightly to 2.69 million and 37 thousand; the peak time of healthcare kept the same at the 65th day, where it needs equivalent hospital beds for severe and critical cases of 25.3 thousand. But if we released high band of rolling intervention intensity to 6 or 8 and simultaneously implemented them in all regions of the UK, the COVID-19 outbreak would not end in 1 year and distribute a multi-modal mode, where the total infections and deaths in the UK possibly reached to 16.2 million and 257 thousand.

[1]  C. Dolea,et al.  World Health Organization , 1949, International Organization.

[2]  R. Mikolajczyk,et al.  Social Contacts and Mixing Patterns Relevant to the Spread of Infectious Diseases , 2008, PLoS medicine.

[3]  Azizur Rahman,et al.  A modified SIR model to study on physical behaviour among smallpox infective population in Bangladesh , 2014 .

[4]  M. Baguelin,et al.  Report 3: Transmissibility of 2019-nCoV , 2020 .

[5]  J. Wallinga,et al.  The incubation period of 2019-nCoV infections among travellers from Wuhan, China , 2020, medRxiv.

[6]  Yang Liu,et al.  Early dynamics of transmission and control of COVID-19: a mathematical modelling study , 2020, The Lancet Infectious Diseases.

[7]  T. Hollingsworth,et al.  How will country-based mitigation measures influence the course of the COVID-19 epidemic? , 2020, The Lancet.

[8]  P. Klepac,et al.  Feasibility of controlling COVID-19 outbreaks by isolation of cases and contacts , 2020, The Lancet Global Health.

[9]  C. Whittaker,et al.  Report 9: Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to reduce COVID19 mortality and healthcare demand , 2020 .

[10]  G. Leung,et al.  Nowcasting and forecasting the potential domestic and international spread of the 2019-nCoV outbreak originating in Wuhan, China: a modelling study , 2020, The Lancet.

[11]  W. Liang,et al.  Modified SEIR and AI prediction of the epidemics trend of COVID-19 in China under public health interventions , 2020, Journal of thoracic disease.

[12]  S. Eubank,et al.  Commentary on Ferguson, et al., “Impact of Non-pharmaceutical Interventions (NPIs) to Reduce COVID-19 Mortality and Healthcare Demand” , 2020, Bulletin of Mathematical Biology.

[13]  Daihai He,et al.  Early estimation of the case fatality rate of COVID-19 in mainland China: a data-driven analysis. , 2020, Annals of translational medicine.

[14]  S. Funk,et al.  The transmissibility of novel Coronavirus in the early stages of the 2019-20 outbreak in Wuhan: Exploring initial point-source exposure sizes and durations using scenario analysis , 2020, Wellcome open research.

[15]  Ruifu Yang,et al.  An investigation of transmission control measures during the first 50 days of the COVID-19 epidemic in China , 2020, Science.

[16]  R. Eggo,et al.  Feasibility of controlling 2019-nCoV outbreaks by isolation of cases and contacts , 2020, medRxiv.

[17]  Zheng Zhao,et al.  Investigation of three clusters of COVID-19 in Singapore: implications for surveillance and response measures , 2020, The Lancet.