Physical distancing interventions and incidence of coronavirus disease 2019: natural experiment in 149 countries

Abstract

ObjectiveTo evaluate the association between physical distancing interventions and incidence of coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) globally.DesignNatural experiment using interrupted time series analysis, with results synthesised using meta-analysis.Setting149 countries or regions, with data on daily reported cases of covid-19 from the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control and data on the physical distancing policies from the Oxford covid-19 Government Response Tracker.ParticipantsIndividual countries or regions that implemented one of the five physical distancing interventions (closures of schools, workplaces, and public transport, restrictions on mass gatherings and public events, and restrictions on movement (lockdowns)) between 1 January and 30 May 2020.Main outcome measureIncidence rate ratios (IRRs) of covid-19 before and after implementation of physical distancing interventions, estimated using data to 30 May 2020 or 30 days post-intervention, whichever occurred first. IRRs were synthesised across countries using random effects meta-analysis.ResultsOn average, implementation of any physical distancing intervention was associated with an overall reduction in covid-19 incidence of 13% (IRR 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.85 to 0.89; n=149 countries). Closure of public transport was not associated with any additional reduction in covid-19 incidence when the other four physical distancing interventions were in place (pooled IRR with and without public transport closure was 0.85, 0.82 to 0.88; n=72, and 0.87, 0.84 to 0.91; n=32, respectively). Data from 11 countries also suggested similar overall effectiveness (pooled IRR 0.85, 0.81 to 0.89) when school closures, workplace closures, and restrictions on mass gatherings were in place. In terms of sequence of interventions, earlier implementation of lockdown was associated with a larger reduction in covid-19 incidence (pooled IRR 0.86, 0.84 to 0.89; n=105) compared with a delayed implementation of lockdown after other physical distancing interventions were in place (pooled IRR 0.90, 0.87 to 0.94; n=41).ConclusionsPhysical distancing interventions were associated with reductions in the incidence of covid-19 globally. No evidence was found of an additional effect of public transport closure when the other four physical distancing measures were in place. Earlier implementation of lockdown was associated with a larger reduction in the incidence of covid-19. These findings might support policy decisions as countries prepare to impose or lift physical distancing measures in current or future epidemic waves.

COVID-19 and climatic factors: A global analysis

“…Any pandemic, and therefore COVID-19, requires a multifaceted expertise and approaches to handle it properly. We need more data to understand the clinical and epidemiological nature of SARS-CoV-2 while we continue to improve our understanding of other closely related areas such as public health interventions,( 27 ) socioeconomic implications,( 28 ) ethical ramifications, environmental insights to name a few. We hope our findings add to the existing literature on the association of climatic factors and COVID-19.…”

Anxiety and Depression During COVID-19 Pandemic Among Medical Students in Nepal

“…On 11 March 2020, this viral infection was declared by WHO -World Health Organization to be a pandemic. Social distancing, frequent hand washing, and self-quarantine have been suggested as adequate measures to limit the disease [2,3]. The virus is major threat to the life, health and to the economy of the individual, family and society.…”

Behavioural, environmental, social, and systems interventions against covid-19

“…Covid-19 has shown the vital importance of human behaviours such as social distancing in controlling pandemics 12. The absence of a cure and an effective vaccine has meant that the world has thus far been reliant on changing behaviours to prevent virus transmission.…”