Setting up and relaxation of public health social and physical distancing measures for COVID-19: a rapid review

Setting up and relaxation of public health social and physical distancing measures for COVID-19: a rapid review

Jill Ryan^1,&, Joseph Okeibunor², Ambrose Talisuna², Charles Shey Wiysonge^1,3,4

¹Cochrane South Africa, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa, ²World Health Organization Regional Office for Africa, Brazzaville, Congo, ³School of Public Health and Family Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa, ⁴Department of Global Health, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa

^&Corresponding author
Jill Ryan, Cochrane South Africa, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa

Introduction    

Physical and social distancing are used to keep a safe distance between people, whether they are infected or not, to limit coronavirus transmission [1-3]. In South Africa, for example, these public health measures started with school closures, prohibition of gatherings of more than 100 people, and ban on travel from countries with community transmission of coronavirus [2]. As the number of cases continued to rise, the country instituted a restrictive national lockdown requiring South Africans to stay at home and only go outside their homes for essential services such as buying food and medicine. However, although physical and social distancing may alter an entire epidemic´s dynamics, these measures are not sustainable over a long period [1]. They can have negative effects on social structures as well as on the economy. Thus, after the first wave of the epidemic, plans on relaxing the measures should begin [1]. This paper seeks to examine the evidence on the setting up and relaxation of public health measures for containing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

Methods     

We conducted searches in PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar [4]; with no restrictions or limiters. In our search strategy, we used combinations of the following keywords: relaxed, measures, restrictions, exit strategy, and COVID-19. The search strategy for PubMed is shown in Table 1. One researcher (JR) conducted the searches, screened the search output, assessed study eligibility, and extracted data; discussing each step with a second researcher (CSW). One researcher (JR) extracted data and translated these into a logical and descriptive summary of the findings.

Results     

The electronic searches yielded 2503 hits, from which we included 10 eligible articles [5-14]. Figure 1 shows the search and selection process for the review. We have summarised the characteristics and findings of the 10 included studies in Tables 2 and 3. Five studies used mathematical modeling or regression trend analysis to assess when to set up and eventually lift physical and social distancing restrictions [5,6,9,10,13]. These studies used COVID-19 data from Wuhan China [5,6], their own country or multiple countries [12], or data from past epidemics of another viral disease [11]. Most of the studies spoke to using immediate lockdown at the start of the epidemic, followed by a phased or staggered approach in easing restrictions whilst using wide-scale testing for localized quarantine and maintaining physical and social distancing for at-risk populations such as the elderly. The studies using mathematical models proposed using such models to predict the best times to lower restrictions. The main model used was either the susceptible-exposed-infected-recovered (SEIR) or susceptible-infected-recovered (SIR) [5,6,13]. The studies suggest that when restrictions are lowered, personal protective equipment should continue to be used [7], workdays should be limited to restrict prolonged exposure [10], and wide-scale testing should be initiated and sustained [8,11-14]. The findings of the other five observational studies [7,8,11,12,14] are consistent with the findings of the five mathematical modeling studies [5,6,9,10,13].

Discussion     

The findings of this paper suggest timely initiation of social and physical distancing measures to limit the spread of virus transmission, followed by a phased approach when relaxing these public health measures. This process should be iterative, dependent on the rise and fall of infection rates during the pandemic duration. Half of the studies in this paper used mathematical predictions to aid decision-making regarding physical and social distancing for containing the COVID-19 pandemic. Ivorra and colleagues note that modelling is a vital tool for decision-making to control human and animal disease spread, but they caution that for real world impact one must create case specific models due to biological characteristics unique to each disease [15]. The ‘suppress and lift’ strategy, addressed by four studies in this paper [5,7,11,12], consists of instituting strict measures during infection peak and lifting the restrictions when infection rates decrease to an acceptable range [16]. The action of instituting restriction measures and lifting them will be intermittent during the epidemic period [16]. It is predicted that a once-off period of social distancing interventions may not be enough, but that a series of sporadic social distancing measures may be needed well into 2022; with the need for surveillance and monitoring of possible contagion resurgence occurring until 2024 [17]. Some level of social distancing may have to be maintained once restrictions are lifted; however, in a manner where such measures are targeted instead of general [16]. In addition, continuous surveillance must take place and further decisions based on real-time data, as it is likely that COVID-19 may evolve in seasonal patterns such as those seen with influenza [16].

The studies in this paper are mostly focused on the global North, perhaps due to their high COVID-19 rates. However, African countries may be negatively impacted by COVID-19 containment measures, due to a substantial informal economic sector and weakened health systems [18,19]. Therefore, context sensitivity is important in the institution and easing of COVID-19 containment measures in African countries and must be acknowledged by African COVID-19 task teams and command centres [18,19]. Hargreaves and colleagues provide important insights from comparing two pandemics, HIV and COVID-19 [20]. They emphasize universal access to essential preventive and treatment services, and a collaborative approach in the provision of COVID-19 interventions. As much as epidemiological models can be used to predict COVID-19 dynamics, we would need a multidisciplinary and collaborative effort in the design, characterization, implementation, and evaluation of interventions [20]. The process of setting up measures should be done timeously and their relaxation must be done in a phased approach, with a staggered re-entry into daily routine such as re-opening of schools and return to economic activities. Given the importance of real time data for this process, adequate support and infrastructure should be provided for surveillance activities to occur. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the African Union should create guidelines on how to contextualise social distancing measures. Contextualised measures would allow best practice methods to limit virus transmission, while effectively managing available resources, capacitating weakened health systems, and providing relief to citizens whose lives and livelihoods have been disrupted by COVID-19 and its containment measures. Care, services and interventions during the pandemic should bridge inequality, not elevate it [20,21].

Conclusion     

The paper highlights that when faced with an epidemic let alone a pandemic, reactions need to be timeous. Whether setting up or relaxing measures all these actions are time sensitive and require up to date information for vital decision making, as seen in most of the studies included in this paper. Whichever strategy was addressed, the need for a gradual phased approach was unanimous; with emphasis placed on health system capacity and continued social distance measures to be in place for successful viral suppression. Furthermore, for efficacy to be guaranteed, we must ensure that measures are contextualised to each country setting.

Competing interests     

The authors declare no competing interest.

Authors' contributions     

CSW conceived the study following a request from AFRO for a policy brief on the topic and JR conceived the search strategy, conducted the searches, did study selection, and wrote the first draft of the paper. JR, JO, AT, and CSW provided important intellectual input and approved the final version of the study. All the authors have read and agreed to the final manuscript.

Acknowledgments     

The authors acknowledge the funding and infrastructural support received from the World Health Organization Regional Office for Africa and the South African Medical Research Council.

Tables and figure     

Table 1: PubMed search strategy

Table 2: characteristics and summary of findings of included mathematical modelling studies

Table 3: characteristics and summary of findings of observational studies included in the review

Figure 1: flow diagram showing the search and selection of studies for the review

References     

1. Cadoni M, Gaeta G. How long does a lockdown need to be? Accessed 07 June 2020.


2. Wiysonge CS. South Africa´s War on COVID-19. 20 April 2020. Accessed 07 June 2020.


3. Nussbaumer-Streit B, Mayr V, Dobrescu AI, Chapman A, Persad E, Klerings I et al. Quarantine alone or in combination with other public health measures to control COVID-19: a rapid review. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Apr 8;4(4):CD013574. PubMed | Google Scholar


4. Godin K, Stapleton J, Kirkpatrick SI, Hanning RM, Leatherdale ST. Applying systematic review search methods to the grey literature: a case study examining guidelines for school-based breakfast programs in Canada. Syst Rev. 2015 Oct 22;4:138. PubMed | Google Scholar


5. Prem K, Liu Y, Russell TW, Kucharski AJ, Eggo RM, Davies N et al. The effect of control strategies to reduce social mixing on outcomes of the COVID-19 epidemic in Wuhan, China: a modelling study. Lancet Public Health. 2020;5(5):e261-e270. PubMed | Google Scholar


6. Colbourn T. COVID-19: extending or relaxing distancing control measures. Lancet Public Health. 2020;5(5):e236-e237. PubMed | Google Scholar


7. Dullien S, Herzog-Stein A, Hohlfeld P, Schreiber S, Tober S. Quick Exit or Deliberate Loosening? On the Future of Contact Restrictions in the COVID-19 Crisis. Wirtschaftsdienst. 2020;100(4):285-290. PubMed | Google Scholar


8. Peto J, Alwan NA, Godfrey KM, Burgess RA, Hunter DJ, Riboli E, Romer P. Universal weekly testing as the UK COVID-19 lockdown exit strategy. Lancet. 2020;395(10234):1420-1421. PubMed | Google Scholar


9. Pérez-Garcia VM. Relaxing quarantine after an epidemic: a mathematical study of the Spanish COVID-19 case. Elsevier. 2020 Apr 8. Google Scholar


10. Stedman M, Davies M, Lunt M, Verma A, Anderson SG, Heald AH. A phased approach to unlocking during the COVID-19 pandemic: lessons from trend analysis. Int J Clin Pract. 2020 May 7;e13528. PubMed | Google Scholar


11. Lawton G. How do we leave lockdown? New Sci. 2020;246(3277):10-12. PubMed | Google Scholar


12. Kupferschmidt K. The lockdowns worked-but what comes next? Science. 2020;368(6488):218-219. PubMed | Google Scholar


13. Friedman E, Friedman J, Johnson S, Landsberg A. Transitioning out of the Coronavirus Lockdown: A Framework for Zone-Based Social Distancing. Accessed 07 June 2020.


14. World Health Organization. Considerations in adjusting public health and social measures in the context of COVID-19: interim guidance. 16 April 2020. Accessed 07 June 2020.


15. Ivorra B, Ferrández MR, Vela-Pérez M, Ramos AM. Mathematical modeling of the spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) taking into account the undetected infections. The case of China. Commun Nonlinear Sci Numer Simul. 2020;88:105303. PubMed | Google Scholar


16. Fadlallah R, El-Jardali F. K2P COVID-19 Series: Exiting the COVID-19 Lockdown: A Road Map for Action. Knowledge to Policy (K2P) Center, Beirut, Lebanon. April 2020;20:3. Google Scholar


17. Kissler SM, Tedijanto C, Goldstein E, Grad YH, Lipsitch M. Projecting the transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 through the postpandemic period. Science. 2020;368(6493):860-868. PubMed | Google Scholar


18. Schröder M, Bossert A, Kersting M, Aeffner S, Coetzee J, Timme M et al. COVID-19 in Africa-outbreak despite interventions. April 2020. Google Scholar


19. Velavan TP, Meyer CG. The COVID-19 epidemic. Trop Med Int Health. 2020;25(3):278-280. PubMed | Google Scholar


20. Hargreaves J, Davey C, Auerbach J, Blanchard J, Bond V, Bonell C et al. Three lessons for the COVID-19 response from pandemic HIV. Lancet HIV. 2020 May;7(5):e309-e311. PubMed | Google Scholar


21. Ebrahim A. COVID-19 and socioeconomic impact in Africa: A case of South Africa. United Nations University World Institute for Development Economics Research. April 2020. Accessed 07 June 2020.