State-level needs for social distancing and contact tracing to contain COVID-19 in the United States

Influences of reopening businesses and social venues: COVID-19 incidence rate in East Texas county

As the on-going severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic, we aimed to understand whether economic reopening (EROP) significantly influenced coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) incidence. COVID-19 data from Texas Health and Human Services between March and August 2020 were analysed. COVID-19 incidence rate (cases per 100 000 population) was compared to statewide for selected urban and rural counties. We used joinpoint regression analysis to identify changes in trends of COVID-19 incidence and interrupted time-series analyses for potential impact of state EROP orders on COVID-19 incidence. We found that the incidence rate increased to 145.1% (95% CI 8.4-454.5%) through 4th April, decreased by 15.5% (95% CI -24.4 -5.9%) between 5th April and 30th May, increased by 93.1% (95% CI 60.9-131.8%) between 31st May and 11th July and decreased by 13.2% (95% CI -22.2 -3.2%) after 12 July 2020. The study demonstrates the EROP policies significantly impacted trends in COVID-19 incidence rates and accounted for increases of 129.9 and 164.6 cases per 100 000 populations for the 24- or 17-week model, respectively, along with other county and state reopening ordinances. The incidence rate decreased sharply after 12th July considering the emphasis on a facemask or covering requirement in business and social settings.

Using Test Positivity and Reported Case Rates to Estimate State-Level COVID-19 Prevalence and Seroprevalence in the United States

Accurate estimates of infection prevalence and seroprevalence are essential for evaluating and informing public health responses needed to address the ongoing spread of COVID-19 in the United States. A data-driven Bayesian single parameter semi-empirical model was developed and used to evaluate state-level prevalence and seroprevalence of COVID-19 using daily reported cases and test positivity ratios. COVID-19 prevalence is well-approximated by the geometric mean of the positivity rate and the reported case rate. As of December 8, 2020, we estimate nation-wide a prevalence of 1.4% [Credible Interval (CrI): 0.8%-1.9%] and a seroprevalence of 11.1% [CrI: 10.1%-12.2%], with state-level prevalence ranging from 0.3% [CrI: 0.2%-0.4%] in Maine to 3.0% [CrI: 1.1%-5.7%] in Pennsylvania, and seroprevalence from 1.4% [CrI: 1.0%-2.0%] in Maine to 22% [CrI: 18%-27%] in New York. The use of this simple and easy-to-communicate model will improve the ability to make public health decisions that effectively respond to the ongoing pandemic.

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF AUTHORS

Dr. Weihsueh A. Chiu, is a professor of environmental health sciences at Texas A&M University. He is an expert in data-driven Bayesian modeling of public health related dynamical systems. Dr. Martial L. Ndeffo-Mbah, is an Assistant Professor of Epidemiology at Texas A&M University. He is an expert in mathematical and computational modeling of infectious diseases.

SUMMARY LINE

Relying on reported cases and test positivity rates individually can result in incorrect inferences as to the spread of COVID-19, and public health decision-making can be improved by instead using their geometric mean as a measure of COVID-19 prevalence and transmission.

Spatial and temporal trends in social vulnerability and COVID-19 incidence and death rates in the United States

BACKGROUND

Emerging evidence suggests that socially vulnerable communities are at higher risk for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreaks in the United States. However, no prior studies have examined temporal trends and differential effects of social vulnerability on COVID-19 incidence and death rates. The purpose of this study was to examine temporal trends among counties with high and low social vulnerability and to quantify disparities in these trends over time. We hypothesized that highly vulnerable counties would have higher incidence and death rates compared to less vulnerable counties and that this disparity would widen as the pandemic progressed.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective longitudinal analysis examining COVID-19 incidence and death rates from March 1 to August 31, 2020 for each county in the US. We obtained daily COVID-19 incident case and death data from USAFacts and the Johns Hopkins Center for Systems Science and Engineering. We classified counties using the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI), a percentile-based measure from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in which higher scores represent more vulnerability. Using a Bayesian hierarchical negative binomial model, we estimated daily risk ratios (RRs) comparing counties in the first (lower) and fourth (upper) SVI quartiles. We adjusted for percentage of the county designated as rural, percentage in poor or fair health, percentage of adult smokers, county average daily fine particulate matter (PM2.5), percentage of primary care physicians per 100,000 residents, and the proportion tested for COVID-19 in the state.

RESULTS

In unadjusted analyses, we found that for most of March 2020, counties in the upper SVI quartile had significantly fewer cases per 100,000 than lower SVI quartile counties. However, on March 30, we observed a crossover effect in which the RR became significantly greater than 1.00 (RR = 1.10, 95% PI: 1.03, 1.18), indicating that the most vulnerable counties had, on average, higher COVID-19 incidence rates compared to least vulnerable counties. Upper SVI quartile counties had higher death rates on average starting on March 30 (RR = 1.17, 95% PI: 1.01,1.36). The death rate RR achieved a maximum value on July 29 (RR = 3.22, 95% PI: 2.91, 3.58), indicating that most vulnerable counties had, on average, 3.22 times more deaths per million than the least vulnerable counties. However, by late August, the lower quartile started to catch up to the upper quartile. In adjusted models, the RRs were attenuated for both incidence cases and deaths, indicating that the adjustment variables partially explained the associations. We also found positive associations between COVID-19 cases and deaths and percentage of the county designated as rural, percentage of resident in fair or poor health, and average daily PM2.5.

CONCLUSIONS

Results indicate that the impact of COVID-19 is not static but can migrate from less vulnerable counties to more vulnerable counties over time. This highlights the importance of protecting vulnerable populations as the pandemic unfolds.