Cargando…
Efficacy and effectiveness of case isolation and quarantine during a growing phase of the COVID-19 epidemic in Finland
Based on data collected as part of the contact tracing activity of the City of Helsinki Epidemiological Operations Unit, we evaluated the efficacy and effectiveness of isolating SARS-CoV-2 cases and quarantining their exposed contacts during a mildly growing phase of the COVID-19 epidemic in Finland...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9817446/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36609431 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-27227-2 |
_version_ | 1784864756070350848 |
---|---|
author | Auranen, Kari Shubin, Mikhail Erra, Elina Isosomppi, Sanna Kontto, Jukka Leino, Tuija Lukkarinen, Timo |
author_facet | Auranen, Kari Shubin, Mikhail Erra, Elina Isosomppi, Sanna Kontto, Jukka Leino, Tuija Lukkarinen, Timo |
author_sort | Auranen, Kari |
collection | PubMed |
description | Based on data collected as part of the contact tracing activity of the City of Helsinki Epidemiological Operations Unit, we evaluated the efficacy and effectiveness of isolating SARS-CoV-2 cases and quarantining their exposed contacts during a mildly growing phase of the COVID-19 epidemic in Finland in autumn 2020. Based on the observed symptom-to-symptom intervals in 1016 pairs of primary and secondary cases, we estimated that without case isolation or quarantine 40[Formula: see text] (90[Formula: see text] credible interval, CI 25–59) of transmission would have occurred on the day of or after symptom onset. One third of SARS-CoV-2 cases (N = 1521) had initially been quarantined, with a self-reported time until isolation (quarantine) of 0.8 days before symptom onset. This delay translates into an efficacy of 50[Formula: see text] (90[Formula: see text] CI 40–63) of averting secondary infections per quarantined case. Due to later isolation (mean 2.6 days after symptoms), the efficacy was smaller (24[Formula: see text] ; 90[Formula: see text] CI 12–41) in those two third of the cases (N = 3101) whose isolation was prompted by their symptoms, i.e. without being previously quarantined. At the population level, we evaluated the effectiveness of case isolation and quarantine on the growth rate of the COVID-19 epidemic in the autumn of 2020. Under a wide range of underlying assumptions, the rate would have been at least 2 times higher without case isolation and quarantine. The numbers needed to isolate or quarantine to prevent one secondary case were 2 and 20, respectively. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9817446 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98174462023-01-06 Efficacy and effectiveness of case isolation and quarantine during a growing phase of the COVID-19 epidemic in Finland Auranen, Kari Shubin, Mikhail Erra, Elina Isosomppi, Sanna Kontto, Jukka Leino, Tuija Lukkarinen, Timo Sci Rep Article Based on data collected as part of the contact tracing activity of the City of Helsinki Epidemiological Operations Unit, we evaluated the efficacy and effectiveness of isolating SARS-CoV-2 cases and quarantining their exposed contacts during a mildly growing phase of the COVID-19 epidemic in Finland in autumn 2020. Based on the observed symptom-to-symptom intervals in 1016 pairs of primary and secondary cases, we estimated that without case isolation or quarantine 40[Formula: see text] (90[Formula: see text] credible interval, CI 25–59) of transmission would have occurred on the day of or after symptom onset. One third of SARS-CoV-2 cases (N = 1521) had initially been quarantined, with a self-reported time until isolation (quarantine) of 0.8 days before symptom onset. This delay translates into an efficacy of 50[Formula: see text] (90[Formula: see text] CI 40–63) of averting secondary infections per quarantined case. Due to later isolation (mean 2.6 days after symptoms), the efficacy was smaller (24[Formula: see text] ; 90[Formula: see text] CI 12–41) in those two third of the cases (N = 3101) whose isolation was prompted by their symptoms, i.e. without being previously quarantined. At the population level, we evaluated the effectiveness of case isolation and quarantine on the growth rate of the COVID-19 epidemic in the autumn of 2020. Under a wide range of underlying assumptions, the rate would have been at least 2 times higher without case isolation and quarantine. The numbers needed to isolate or quarantine to prevent one secondary case were 2 and 20, respectively. Nature Publishing Group UK 2023-01-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9817446/ /pubmed/36609431 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-27227-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Auranen, Kari Shubin, Mikhail Erra, Elina Isosomppi, Sanna Kontto, Jukka Leino, Tuija Lukkarinen, Timo Efficacy and effectiveness of case isolation and quarantine during a growing phase of the COVID-19 epidemic in Finland |
title | Efficacy and effectiveness of case isolation and quarantine during a growing phase of the COVID-19 epidemic in Finland |
title_full | Efficacy and effectiveness of case isolation and quarantine during a growing phase of the COVID-19 epidemic in Finland |
title_fullStr | Efficacy and effectiveness of case isolation and quarantine during a growing phase of the COVID-19 epidemic in Finland |
title_full_unstemmed | Efficacy and effectiveness of case isolation and quarantine during a growing phase of the COVID-19 epidemic in Finland |
title_short | Efficacy and effectiveness of case isolation and quarantine during a growing phase of the COVID-19 epidemic in Finland |
title_sort | efficacy and effectiveness of case isolation and quarantine during a growing phase of the covid-19 epidemic in finland |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9817446/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36609431 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-27227-2 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT auranenkari efficacyandeffectivenessofcaseisolationandquarantineduringagrowingphaseofthecovid19epidemicinfinland AT shubinmikhail efficacyandeffectivenessofcaseisolationandquarantineduringagrowingphaseofthecovid19epidemicinfinland AT erraelina efficacyandeffectivenessofcaseisolationandquarantineduringagrowingphaseofthecovid19epidemicinfinland AT isosomppisanna efficacyandeffectivenessofcaseisolationandquarantineduringagrowingphaseofthecovid19epidemicinfinland AT konttojukka efficacyandeffectivenessofcaseisolationandquarantineduringagrowingphaseofthecovid19epidemicinfinland AT leinotuija efficacyandeffectivenessofcaseisolationandquarantineduringagrowingphaseofthecovid19epidemicinfinland AT lukkarinentimo efficacyandeffectivenessofcaseisolationandquarantineduringagrowingphaseofthecovid19epidemicinfinland |