Evidence of pandemic fatigue associated with stricter tiered COVID-19 restrictions

Despite the availability of effective vaccines against SARS-CoV-2, non-pharmaceutical interventions remain an important part of the effort to reduce viral circulation caused by emerging variants with the capability of evading vaccine-induced immunity. With the aim of striking a balance between effective mitigation and long-term sustainability, several governments worldwide have adopted systems of tiered interventions, of increasing stringency, that are calibrated according to periodic risk assessments. A key challenge remains in quantifying temporal changes in adherence to interventions, which can decrease over time due to pandemic fatigue, under such kind of multilevel strategies. Here, we examine whether there was a reduction in adherence to tiered restrictions that were imposed in Italy from November 2020 through May 2021, and in particular we assess whether temporal trends in adherence depended on the intensity of the restrictions adopted. We analyzed daily changes in movements and in residential time, combining mobility data with the restriction tier enforced in the Italian regions. Through mixed-effects regression models, we identified a general trend of reduction in adherence and an additional effect of faster waning associated with the most stringent tier. We estimated both effects being of the same order of magnitude, suggesting that adherence decreased twice as fast during the strictest tier as in the least stringent one. Our results provide a quantitative measure of behavioral responses to tiered interventions—a metric of pandemic fatigue—that can be integrated into mathematical models to evaluate future epidemic scenarios.

[1]  J. Warren,et al.  Impact of close interpersonal contact on COVID-19 incidence: Evidence from 1 year of mobile device data , 2022, Science advances.

[2]  M. Green,et al.  Evaluating the impacts of tiered restrictions introduced in England, during October and December 2020 on COVID-19 cases: a synthetic control study , 2021, BMJ Open.

[3]  Michael R. Springborn,et al.  Researchers' Degrees-of-Flexibility and the Credibility of Difference-in-Differences Estimates: Evidence From the Pandemic Policy Evaluations , 2021 .

[4]  S. Merler,et al.  The effect of COVID-19 vaccination in Italy and perspectives for living with the virus , 2021, Nature Communications.

[5]  T. Benmarhnia,et al.  The role of the California tier system in controlling population mobility during the COVID-19 pandemic , 2021, BMC Public Health.

[6]  A. Vespignani,et al.  Anatomy of the first six months of COVID-19 vaccination campaign in Italy , 2021, medRxiv.

[7]  C. Buckee,et al.  Evaluating the reliability of mobility metrics from aggregated mobile phone data as proxies for SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the USA: a population-based study , 2021, The Lancet Digital Health.

[8]  A. Petherick,et al.  A year of living distantly: global trends in the use of stay-at-home orders over the first 12 months of the COVID-19 pandemic , 2021, Interface Focus.

[9]  A. Tatem,et al.  Domestic and international mobility trends in the United Kingdom during the COVID-19 pandemic: an analysis of facebook data , 2021, International Journal of Health Geographics.

[10]  Eduardo B. Andrade,et al.  A worldwide assessment of changes in adherence to COVID-19 protective behaviours and hypothesized pandemic fatigue , 2021, Nature Human Behaviour.

[11]  E. Gabrilovich,et al.  Early social distancing policies in Europe, changes in mobility & COVID-19 case trajectories: Insights from Spring 2020 , 2021, PloS one.

[12]  C. Viboud,et al.  Despite vaccination, China needs non-pharmaceutical interventions to prevent widespread outbreaks of COVID-19 in 2021 , 2021, Nature Human Behaviour.

[13]  V. Colizza,et al.  Effect of delayed awareness and fatigue on the efficacy of self-isolation in epidemic control. , 2021, Physical review. E.

[14]  V. Colizza,et al.  Adherence and sustainability of interventions informing optimal control against the COVID-19 pandemic , 2021, Communications Medicine.

[15]  V. Colizza,et al.  Highlighting socio-economic constraints on mobility reductions during COVID-19 restrictions in France can inform effective and equitable pandemic response , 2021, Journal of travel medicine.

[16]  A. Rizzo,et al.  How adherence to public health measures shapes epidemic spreading: A temporal network model. , 2021, Chaos.

[17]  M. Petersen,et al.  Compliance without fear: Individual‐level protective behaviour during the first wave of the COVID‐19 pandemic , 2021, British journal of health psychology.

[18]  D. Spiegelhalter,et al.  COVID-19 risk perception: a longitudinal analysis of its predictors and associations with health protective behaviours in the United Kingdom , 2021, Journal of Risk Research.

[19]  A. Steptoe,et al.  Patterns of compliance with COVID-19 preventive behaviours: a latent class analysis of 20 000 UK adults , 2021, Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health.

[20]  S. Bhatt,et al.  Reduction in mobility and COVID-19 transmission , 2021, Nature Communications.

[21]  S. Merler,et al.  Impact of tiered restrictions on human activities and the epidemiology of the second wave of COVID-19 in Italy , 2021, Nature Communications.

[22]  P. Bajardi,et al.  The importance of non-pharmaceutical interventions during the COVID-19 vaccine rollout , 2021, medRxiv.

[23]  Nicola Perra,et al.  Non-pharmaceutical interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic: A review , 2020, Physics Reports.

[24]  P. Bajardi,et al.  Socio-economic determinants of mobility responses during the first wave of COVID-19 in Italy: from provinces to neighbourhoods , 2020, Journal of the Royal Society Interface.

[25]  Andrew M. Dai,et al.  Impacts of social distancing policies on mobility and COVID-19 case growth in the US , 2020, Nature Communications.

[26]  E. Zagheni,et al.  The Role of Vulnerability in Mediating the Relationship between Threat Perception and the Use of Face Masks in the Context of COVID-19 , 2021, ICWSM Workshops.

[27]  Y. Teh,et al.  Inferring the effectiveness of government interventions against COVID-19 , 2020, Science.

[28]  C. Betsch,et al.  Pandemic Fatigue: Measurement, Correlates, and Consequences , 2020 .

[29]  N. Harvey Behavioral Fatigue: Real Phenomenon, Naïve Construct, or Policy Contrivance? , 2020, Frontiers in Psychology.

[30]  N. Harvey,et al.  The concept of “fatigue” in tackling covid-19 , 2020, BMJ.

[31]  Huaiping Zhu,et al.  Four-tier response system and spatial propagation of COVID-19 in China by a network model☆ , 2020, Mathematical Biosciences.

[32]  K. Abbasi Behavioural fatigue: a flawed idea central to a flawed pandemic response , 2020, BMJ.

[33]  Michael R. Springborn,et al.  Social distancing responses to COVID-19 emergency declarations strongly differentiated by income , 2020, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[34]  A. Londei,et al.  Ranking the effectiveness of worldwide COVID-19 government interventions , 2020, Nature Human Behaviour.

[35]  P. Bajardi,et al.  COVID-19 outbreak response, a dataset to assess mobility changes in Italy following national lockdown , 2020, Scientific Data.

[36]  E. Dong,et al.  Association between mobility patterns and COVID-19 transmission in the USA: a mathematical modelling study , 2020, The Lancet Infectious Diseases.

[37]  David L. Smith,et al.  Mapping global variation in human mobility , 2020, Nature Human Behaviour.

[38]  Sang Woo Park,et al.  Modeling shield immunity to reduce COVID-19 epidemic spread , 2020, Nature Medicine.

[39]  A. L. Schmidt,et al.  Economic and social consequences of human mobility restrictions under COVID-19 , 2020, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[40]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .