Cargando…

Mass screening vs lockdown vs combination of both to control COVID-19: A systematic review

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global pandemic. Non-pharmacological interventions, such as lockdown and mass testing, remain as the mainstay of control measures for the outbreak. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of mass testing, lockdown, or a combination of both to control COVID-19 pa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Johanna, Nadya, Citrawijaya, Henrico, Wangge, Grace
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: PAGEPress Publications, Pavia, Italy 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7771023/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33409247
http://dx.doi.org/10.4081/jphr.2020.2011
_version_ 1783629633123516416
author Johanna, Nadya
Citrawijaya, Henrico
Wangge, Grace
author_facet Johanna, Nadya
Citrawijaya, Henrico
Wangge, Grace
author_sort Johanna, Nadya
collection PubMed
description Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global pandemic. Non-pharmacological interventions, such as lockdown and mass testing, remain as the mainstay of control measures for the outbreak. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of mass testing, lockdown, or a combination of both to control COVID-19 pandemic. A systematic search on 11 major databases was conducted on June 8, 2020. This review is registered in Prospero (CRD420201 90546). We included primary studies written in English which investigate mass screening, lockdown, or a combination of both to control and/or mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic. There are four important outcomes as selected by WHO experts for their decision- making process: incident cases, onward transmission, mortality, and resource use. Among 623 studies, only 14 studies met our criteria. Four observational studies were rated as strong evidence and ten modelling studies were rated as moderate evidence. Based on one modelling study, mass testing reduced the total infected people compared to no mass testing. For lockdown, ten studies consistently showed that it successfully reduced the incidence, onward transmission, and mortality rate of COVID-19. A limited evidence showed that a combination of lockdown and mass screening resulted in a greater reduction of incidence and mortality rate compared to lockdown only. However, there is not enough evidence on the effectiveness of mass testing only.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7771023
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher PAGEPress Publications, Pavia, Italy
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77710232021-01-05 Mass screening vs lockdown vs combination of both to control COVID-19: A systematic review Johanna, Nadya Citrawijaya, Henrico Wangge, Grace J Public Health Res Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global pandemic. Non-pharmacological interventions, such as lockdown and mass testing, remain as the mainstay of control measures for the outbreak. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of mass testing, lockdown, or a combination of both to control COVID-19 pandemic. A systematic search on 11 major databases was conducted on June 8, 2020. This review is registered in Prospero (CRD420201 90546). We included primary studies written in English which investigate mass screening, lockdown, or a combination of both to control and/or mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic. There are four important outcomes as selected by WHO experts for their decision- making process: incident cases, onward transmission, mortality, and resource use. Among 623 studies, only 14 studies met our criteria. Four observational studies were rated as strong evidence and ten modelling studies were rated as moderate evidence. Based on one modelling study, mass testing reduced the total infected people compared to no mass testing. For lockdown, ten studies consistently showed that it successfully reduced the incidence, onward transmission, and mortality rate of COVID-19. A limited evidence showed that a combination of lockdown and mass screening resulted in a greater reduction of incidence and mortality rate compared to lockdown only. However, there is not enough evidence on the effectiveness of mass testing only. PAGEPress Publications, Pavia, Italy 2020-12-18 /pmc/articles/PMC7771023/ /pubmed/33409247 http://dx.doi.org/10.4081/jphr.2020.2011 Text en ©Copyright: the Author(s) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Johanna, Nadya
Citrawijaya, Henrico
Wangge, Grace
Mass screening vs lockdown vs combination of both to control COVID-19: A systematic review
title Mass screening vs lockdown vs combination of both to control COVID-19: A systematic review
title_full Mass screening vs lockdown vs combination of both to control COVID-19: A systematic review
title_fullStr Mass screening vs lockdown vs combination of both to control COVID-19: A systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Mass screening vs lockdown vs combination of both to control COVID-19: A systematic review
title_short Mass screening vs lockdown vs combination of both to control COVID-19: A systematic review
title_sort mass screening vs lockdown vs combination of both to control covid-19: a systematic review
topic Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7771023/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33409247
http://dx.doi.org/10.4081/jphr.2020.2011
work_keys_str_mv AT johannanadya massscreeningvslockdownvscombinationofbothtocontrolcovid19asystematicreview
AT citrawijayahenrico massscreeningvslockdownvscombinationofbothtocontrolcovid19asystematicreview
AT wanggegrace massscreeningvslockdownvscombinationofbothtocontrolcovid19asystematicreview