A new study looking at the relationship between reduced mobility of other people and the spread of the coronavirus in 2020 shows that, in some countries, the virus spread faster when other people stayed home. , to be more effective in minimizing the spread of SARS-CoV-2 than excessive mobility restrictions in many countries.
“More than two years mark the beginning of the pandemic that has replaced the lives of many of us in a variety of ways. The current progression of the spread of SARS-CoV-2 suggests that this bankruptcy of the story titled COVID-19 may simply. Thinking about how we’ve responded to the pandemic can help us receive helpful classes on how to minimize the damage of similar challenges, especially now that infectious diseases seem to be a problem. threat. threat re-emerging,” say researchers Mounir Ould Setti and Sylvain Tollis.
Government-imposed lockdowns and movement restrictions have probably been the hallmark of the reaction to this pandemic. These interventions have been found to be invasive in certain cases and settings. Have lockdowns and movement restrictions been effective in reducing the spread of SARS-CoV-2? Researchers at the University of Eastern Finland analyzed how the movement of other people aligned with daily changes in the effective replication number of SARS-CoV-2. The effective replication number reflects the rate of disease spread, as it captures dynamic adjustments in viral transmission from one user to another. Mobility metrics are discovered in the anonymous location knowledge of Google users who have location history enabled on their mobile phones. Positions are classified in other mobility categories, including, for example, residential mobility, which indicates that other people stay at home. The researchers focused on the pre-vaccination phase and pre-concern variants of the pandemic from February 15 to December 31, 2020 by analyzing daily changes in the mobility and spread of SARS-CoV-2. in 125 countries and 52 regions. or US states. Array
The research met 3 country teams based on correlation patterns between the signs of mobility and the actual number of replicas of SARS-CoV-2. Group 1 consisted of countries with “normal” correlations, i. e. negative correlations between residential mobility and the spread of SARS-CoV. -2, for example, the United States, Turkey and the maximum number of OECD countries. Group 2 included countries with “inverted” correlations, referring to positive correlations between residential mobility and the spread of SARS-CoV-2. Group 3 composed of countries with more complex correlation patterns or “inconclusive” correlations.
In Group 1 countries like Austria, the more time other people spend at home, the lower the spread of the disease, while in Group 2 countries like Bolivia the exact opposite is observed: the more time other people spend at home, the lower the disease. In addition, in many countries, correlation patterns between mobility and disease spread showed minimal spread of the disease at an intermediate point of mobility restriction (“U” correlations), indicating a sweet spot above which restricting other people’s mobility can lead to further spread of the disease. illness. In other words, complete blockades may have backfired to certain degrees and in some countries.
The authors concluded that a systematic investigation of correlations between mobility and disease spread at the regional point could only identify the mobility restriction sweet spot that minimizes the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in that express region.
University of Eastern Finland
In-depth investigation of the correlation of the number of effective REPRODUCTIONS of SARS-CoV-2 and mobility patterns: 3 country teams. J Prev Med Public Health. Published online February 10, 2022. doi. org/10. 3961/jpmph. 21. 522
News-Medical. net – An AZoNetwork website
Ownership and operation through AZoNetwork, © 2000-2022