To contain the spread of COVID-19, a cordon sanitaire was put in place in Wuhan prior to the Lunar New Year, on 23 January 2020. We assess the efficacy of the cordon sanitaire to delay the ...introduction and onset of local transmission of COVID-19 in other major cities in mainland China.
We estimated the number of infected travellers from Wuhan to other major cities in mainland China from November 2019 to February 2020 using previously estimated COVID-19 prevalence in Wuhan and publicly available mobility data. We focused on Beijing, Chongqing, Hangzhou, and Shenzhen as four representative major cities to identify the potential independent contribution of the cordon sanitaire and holiday travel. To do this, we simulated outbreaks generated by infected arrivals in these destination cities using stochastic branching processes. We also modelled the effect of the cordon sanitaire in combination with reduced transmissibility scenarios to simulate the effect of local non-pharmaceutical interventions.
We find that in the four cities, given the potentially high prevalence of COVID-19 in Wuhan between December 2019 and early January 2020, local transmission may have been seeded as early as 1-8 January 2020. By the time the cordon sanitaire was imposed, infections were likely in the thousands. The cordon sanitaire alone did not substantially affect the epidemic progression in these cities, although it may have had some effect in smaller cities. Reduced transmissibility resulted in a notable decrease in the incidence of infection in the four studied cities.
Our results indicate that sustained transmission was likely occurring several weeks prior to the implementation of the cordon sanitaire in four major cities of mainland China and that the observed decrease in incidence was likely attributable to other non-pharmaceutical, transmission-reducing interventions.
After Action Reviews (AAR) with a One Health perspective were performed in Slovenia, Italy, Serbia and Greece following a severe West Nile virus (WNV) transmission season in 2018. A protocol ...combining traditional techniques and organizational process analysis was developed and then implemented in each country.
In 2018, response to the unusually intense transmission season of WNV in Slovenia, Italy, Serbia and Greece took place through routine response mechanisms. None of the four countries declared a national or subnational emergency. We found a very strong consensus on the strengths identified in responding to this event. All countries indicated the availability of One Health Plans for surveillance and response; very high laboratory diagnostic capacity in the human, veterinary and entomology sectors and strong inter-sectoral collaboration with strong commitment of engaged institutions as critical in the management of the event. Finally, countries implementing One Health surveillance for WNV (in terms of early warning and early activation of prevention measures) consistently reported a positive impact on their activities, in particular when combining mosquito and bird surveillance with surveillance of cases in humans and equids. Recurring priority areas for improvement included: increasing knowledge on vector-control measures, ensuring the sustainability of vector monitoring and surveillance, and improving capacity to manage media pressure.
The AARs presented here demonstrate the benefit of cross-sectoral and cross-disciplinary approaches to preparedness for West Nile virus outbreaks in Europe. In the coming years, priorities include fostering and strengthening arrangements that: enable coordinated One Health surveillance and response during WNV transmission seasons; ensure adequate laboratory capacities; strengthen risk communication; and fund longer-term research to address the knowledge gaps identified in this study.
Marked reductions in the incidence of measles and rubella have been observed since the widespread use of the measles and rubella vaccines. Although no global goal for measles eradication has been ...established, all six WHO regions have set measles elimination targets. However, a gap remains between current control levels and elimination targets, as shown by large measles outbreaks between 2017 and 2019. We aimed to model the potential for measles and rubella elimination globally to inform a WHO report to the 73rd World Health Assembly on the feasibility of measles and rubella eradication.
In this study, we modelled the probability of measles and rubella elimination between 2020 and 2100 under different vaccination scenarios in 93 countries of interest. We evaluated measles and rubella burden and elimination across two national transmission models each (Dynamic Measles Immunisation Calculation Engine DynaMICE, Pennsylvania State University PSU, Johns Hopkins University, and Public Health England models), and one subnational measles transmission model (Institute for Disease Modeling model). The vaccination scenarios included a so-called business as usual approach, which continues present vaccination coverage, and an intensified investment approach, which increases coverage into the future. The annual numbers of infections projected by each model, country, and vaccination scenario were used to explore if, when, and for how long the infections would be below a threshold for elimination.
The intensified investment scenario led to large reductions in measles and rubella incidence and burden. Rubella elimination is likely to be achievable in all countries and measles elimination is likely in some countries, but not all. The PSU and DynaMICE national measles models estimated that by 2050, the probability of elimination would exceed 75% in 14 (16%) and 36 (39%) of 93 modelled countries, respectively. The subnational model of measles transmission highlighted inequity in routine coverage as a likely driver of the continuance of endemic measles transmission in a subset of countries.
To reach regional elimination goals, it will be necessary to innovate vaccination strategies and technologies that increase spatial equity of routine vaccination, in addition to investing in existing surveillance and outbreak response programmes.
WHO, Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
When a novel pathogen emerges there may be opportunities to eliminate transmission - locally or globally - whilst case numbers are low. However, the effort required to push a disease to elimination ...may come at a vast cost at a time when uncertainty is high. Models currently inform policy discussions on this question, but there are a number of open challenges, particularly given unknown aspects of the pathogen biology, the effectiveness and feasibility of interventions, and the intersecting political, economic, sociological and behavioural complexities for a novel pathogen. In this overview, we detail how models might identify directions for better leveraging or expanding the scope of data available on the pathogen trajectory, for bounding the theoretical context of emergence relative to prospects for elimination, and for framing the larger economic, behavioural and social context that will influence policy decisions and the pathogen’s outcome.
•In the extremes, there are two possible fates for a novel pathogen: elimination, or endemicity.•Basic theory describes broad conditions for pathogen elimination; and expected characteristics of endemic circulation. But, the devil is in the details, especially for emergent infections.•We review challenges and opportunities for developing models to evaluate risks and policy options around endemic establishment or elimination of novel pathogens.•These include supporting data collection, developing novel metrics in identifying whether an emergent pathogen is on the path to elimination, better mapping broader economic and behavioural features, and their influence on infection dynamics.•Expansion of models suited to addressing this vast array of topics has the potential to help inform the policy response to future emergent pathogens.
Highlights • Dynamical shifts at low levels of infection pose challenges to eradication efforts. • Incorporating economics into dynamic models is key for improving control. • Heterogeneity in ...susceptibility and connectivity poses data and modelling challenges. • Modelling can improve surveillance and monitoring during and after the endgame.
Gavi estimates that at least 13.5 million people are missing vaccinations, and that will rise as the pandemic continues.2 Hence, the burden of vaccine-preventable diseases will increase as a ...consequence of COVID-19: this is especially true in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), which already suffer from a greater infectious disease burden than high-income countries and where the pandemic could, as elsewhere, overwhelm health systems that have a lower capacity. Sustaining routine vaccination programmes in Africa, for example, is estimated to prevent 140 deaths for every excess COVID-19 death attributable to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections acquired during the routine vaccination visits.3 Uncertainties loom over future vaccine financing, as the postpandemic outlook for development assistance for health (DAH) is unclear. Gavi is the main distributor of vaccine-specific donor funding, contributing US$1.52 billion in 2018 (54% of donor vaccine-funding),7 and Gavi’s aid has helped increase vaccination coverage.8 Gavi’s aim is for partner countries to achieve financial and programmatic independence that sustains high immunisation coverage.9 To achieve this goal, Gavi also supports health system strengthening, which is particularly important because vaccine costs purport only a small proportion of the funds required for vaccine delivery. ...the costs derived from the cost-effectiveness study are higher than the vaccine progress report since the study accounts for costs such as training and social mobilisation that are not included in the reports.
For vaccine-preventable infections, immunization generally needs to be supplemented by palliative care of individuals missed by the vaccination. Costs and availability of vaccine doses and palliative ...care vary by disease and by region. In many situations, resources for delivery of palliative care are independent of resources required for vaccination; however we also need to consider the conservative scenario where there is some trade-off between efforts, which is of potential relevance for resource-poor settings. We formulate an SEIR model that includes those two control strategies--vaccination and palliative care. We consider their relative merit and optimal allocation in the context of a highly efficacious vaccine, and under the assumption that palliative care may reduce transmission. We investigate the utility of a range of mixed or pure strategies that can be implemented after an epidemic has started, and look for rule-of-thumb principles of how best to reduce the burden of disease during an acute outbreak over a spectrum of vaccine-preventable infections. Intuitively, we expect the best strategy to initially focus on vaccination, and enhanced palliative care after the infection has peaked, but a number of plausible realistic constraints for control result in important qualifications on the intervention strategy. The time in the epidemic when one should switch strategy depends sensitively on the relative cost of vaccine to palliative care, the available budget, and R0. Crucially, outbreak response vaccination may be more effective in managing low-R0 diseases, while high R0 scenarios enhance the importance of routine vaccination and case management.