Evaluating the burden of COVID-19 on hospital resources in Bahia, Brazil: A modelling-based analysis of 14.8 million individuals

Data sources and case definition

The models produced in this study were informed by data from multiple sources: The daily series of the cumulative confirmed COVID-19 cases and the daily mortality series for the state of Bahia, its capital Salvador and the remaining inland cities were obtained from the Secretary of Health of the State of Bahia (SESAB). Throughout our analyses we consider separately the capital (which concentrate the number of cases in the state) and inland cities. Local health authorities use the following definition of COVID-19 case, based on two criteria: (i) clinical/epidemiological, namely a case of suspected flu-like syndrome or severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) who had contact with a laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 case in the last 7 days prior to symptoms onset; or (ii) clinical/laboratory, a suspected case of flu-like syndrome or SARS with a positive SARS-CoV-2 serology (IgM and/or IgG) or real-time PCR result.

Additionally, we also obtained the state-level daily hospital bed occupancy for both clinical and ICU beds. At the time of writing, the state has a total of 888 hospital beds available for specifically treatment of COVID-19 patients, of which 466 comprise clinical hospitalization and 422 beds for ICUs. This data was not available at the municipality-level; rather, due to the Brazilian administrative division of health regions, hospital bed occupancy was evaluated at the state-level only. This data was also provided by SESAB throughout the period of March 6^th to May 4^th, 2020.

We also obtained data on patients admitted to a reference infectious disease hospital located in Salvador (Instituto Couto Maia; ICM). Individual-level trajectories of 231 patients from admission to discharge/death were followed from March 23^th to April 16^th. The ICM is the leading public hospital in the state of Bahia for treatment of COVID-19 patients. The collected data, aggregated across patients, informed the hospitalization-related model parameters, including the search intervals for the optimization procedures.

The estimated population of Bahia in 2020 was obtained by the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE).

Assumptions and model construction

In this section we present the SEIIHURD model that subdivides the population into eight compartments, as follows: susceptible (S), those who are not exposed to the disease; exposed (E), individuals who have been exposed to the virus and are in a latent, non-transmittable period; (I) infectious, those currently infected and capable of transmitting the disease to whom they contact; recovered (R), those who were previously infected and either recovered from the disease or were removed as a result of death due to COVID-19 and consequently do not affect the transmission dynamics. The infectious individuals are further separated into asymptomatic, denoted I_a, and symptomatic, denoted by I_s. Current evidence suggests that the majority of COVID-19 infections result in mild to moderate symptoms that do not require hospitalization. However, a proportion of the infected will present with severe symptoms resulting into hospitalization (clinical beds) (H), while those in critical conditions will eventually require ICU admission (U). For simplicity, we have neglected the transmission of individuals in compartments H and U, assuming that hospital containment decreases the chances of contact with susceptible individuals. We also consider a flux of patients between the H and U compartments, as individuals initially admitted to a clinical ward may worsen their condition and require an ICU bed. Furthermore, all patients in U are transferred to H prior to discharge and recovery. In Figure 1 we present the flow diagram of the proposed model. Similar works can be found in^9,13,20,21.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 1.

Flow diagram for modelling the dynamics of COVID-19 transmission in the 8-compartment SEIIHURD model

To account for local interventions of movement restriction (such as governmental stay-at-home orders), we consider the transmission rate as a function of time, varying according to local measures. To define β, let {t₁, t₂,…, t_n} be a set of points in time defining the change on the transmission rate. Then, we can write β as a function of time t as: where is a Heaviside step function, β_i are transmission rates that can be obtained by the fitting of the data to the time interval defined by the t_i’s. The system of differential equations then reads:

For more details about the system of equations, see Supplementary File 1.

Analytical evaluation of ℛ₀ and ℛ(t) of the SEIIHURD model

The basic reproductive number ℛ₀ has been derived within the general next generation operator framework^21,22. It considers the unstable disease-free equilibrium point of the model, where S corresponds to the whole population and all other compartments are identically set to 0. Following²², the value of ℛ₀ results from a balance between the infectious and transition terms of the sub-model composed by the variables (E, I_a, I_s) associated with the transmission of the disease, which are gathered in the corresponding 3 × 3 matrices and , given by:

Thus, given the above matrices, ℛ₀ corresponds to the largest eigenvalue of the matrix and represents the sum of the contribution of the symptomatic and asymptomatic transmission, being expressed by

The effective reproduction number ℛ(t) provides a measure of how the newly infected part of the population will further transmit the pathogen as the epidemic evolves over time. Indeed, as reminded above, the evaluation of ℛ₀ considers that the whole population is initially susceptible, a condition that is strictly valid only when the pathogen is first introduced into the system. As time evolves, the susceptible fraction of the population always decreases with time for models where the recovered compartment does not feed the susceptible one. It is still unknown whether re-infection by SARS-CoV-2 can occur, but initial evidence suggests against this possibility²³. Here we assume that only a single COVID-19 infection event can occur in any single person.

The epidemiological meaning of ℛ(t) is the same as for ℛ₀, namely, it represents the average number of secondary infections that an individual, who became infected at time t, is able to generate. The series of ℛ(t) values indicates the current trend of the epidemic and captures changes caused by recently-introduced interventions (such as governmental policies) or by natural decrease of the susceptible population. Accordingly, it provides a quantitative evidence of whether further measures are needed to control the epidemic. Here ℛ(t) has been estimated following the assumptions introduced in²⁴. It is based on the series of daily infected individuals, that is considered here as the source to insert into the general renewal equation for a birth process

In an epidemiological context, b(t) represents the daily number of new cases, while g(x) is the disease probability distribution function for the time for an individual to infect secondary cases. In this case, the function g(x) is a contribution of the three compartments E, I_a, I_s that impact the evaluation of ℛ₀. Therefore, we can write

In order to overcome the fluctuations of the confirmed number of cases (which is influenced by testing capacity and its associated increase, even if momentarily, such as when pending tests accumulate), we present two series of R_t, one calculated from the daily number of confirmed cases, as informed by local health authorities; and another R_t series where this data is informed by the predictions of the model.

The estimation occurred within a chosen range based on literature and data collected locally, as described in Supplementary Table 1. The initial conditions (S₀; I_a,0; I_a,0;E₀;R₀;H₀;U₀;D₀) is given by (1−I_a,0−I_s;0−E₀; I_s;0; I_a,0; I_s;0;E₀;0;0;0;0).

Parameter sensitivity analysis

Sensitivity analysis was conducted to assess the effects of model parameters in the dynamics of I_a, I_s, U, H and D over time. By using an statistical variance-based method, described by Sobol²⁵, the sensitivity analysis of the system described by Eqs. (2)-(9), considers the following parameter vector and assumes that its elements are uniformly distributed in proper intervals as follows:

This method is divided in two steps, described in detail in Supplementary File 2. The numerical simulations were performed using the SALib library²⁶, and the experiments were conducted generating N = 12000 samples.

Evaluation and estimation of model parameters

The parameters p; κ; γ_a; γ_s; ξ;ω_U;ω_H; μ_U; μ_H were kept fixed and the remaining were obtained by estimating the best values that fit the model to the data (see Supplementary Table 1). To define the fixed parameters and the search intervals to use for the estimations, we performed a literature review of published paper and collected the information regarding to key epidemiological parameters that inform our model (see Supplementary File 3).

As an additional guide to obtain a locally-informed model, hospitalization data from a reference infectious disease hospital (ICM; see Data Sources section) were used and helped to evaluate the parameters. Routine clinical data were extracted to obtain estimates of mean hospitalization period (γ_H), mean ICU period (γ_U), death rate of hospitalized individuals (μ_H), death rate of ICU individuals (μ_U), proportion of clinically hospitalized transferred to ICU (ω_H) and proportion of ICU individuals that return to clinical hospitalization (ω_u) (see Supplementary Table 2).

The parameters of the model were estimated using the Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) metaheuristic²⁷. PSO is a population stochastic optimization technique for non-linear functions, based on the collective intelligence behavior of animals, with broad applications in the literature. Under the PSO framework, we used a multi-optimization function to simultaneously optimize the model to the series of cumulative confirmed cases and the series of cumulative deaths in the state, its capital city Salvador and the remaining inland cities up to May 4th. PSO was implemented using pyswarms library version 1.1.0 for Python 3 (http://python.org)²⁸, and was executed with 300 particles through 1,000 iterations with cognitive parameter 0.1, social parameter 0.3, inertia parameter 0.9, evaluating five closest neighbors through Euclidean (or L2) distance metric. In addition to the point estimates obtained by the PSO method for the parameters β₀, β₁, γ, h, γ_H and γ_U, percentile confidence intervals were also built for these parameters. The intervals were constructed using the weighted non-parametric bootstrap method²⁹, considering 500 replicates of the original series St, t = 1, …, n, which represents the number of new cases observed at time t. The proportion of observed cases at time t (number of cases at time t/total number of cases in the analyzed period) was used as a weight in the re-sampling process to obtain the bootstrap replicates. Then, the SEIIHURD model was adjusted for each replicated series and the estimates obtained for the model parameters were stored in vectors, generating the empirical distribution of each parameter.

Modelling scenarios

We present our analysis as follows: First, we study the effect of previously enforced interventions in the state of Bahia, its capital city Salvador and the remaining inland cities. For this, we considered the SEIIHURD model with the proportion of symptomatic needing hospitalization or ICU (parameter h equals to zero), so that the resulting model does not consider the compartments of hospitalization, ICU and death, effectively resembling an SEIR model with asymptomatic transmission.

Second, we analyse these effects on the number of death and hospitalization requirements considering the state as a whole. Then, we show the impact of the asymptomatic infected individuals on the dynamic of COVID-19 transmission.

Lastly, to study future behaviour of the transmission of the disease in Bahia, we simulated different scenarios that may impact on the number of cases, mortality and health care infrastructure. The following scenarios were considered: (1) An immediate intervention on the May 5^th, sustained for a period of 7, 14 or 30 days, and reducing the rate of transmission by 25%, 50% or 75%; (2) A critical intervention, adopted when the collapse of clinical bed occupancy occurs (on 05/14/20, the predicted date), maintained for a period of 7, 14, 30, 60, 90 days and reducing the rate of transmission by 25%, 50% or 75%; (3) and last, implementations of more than two interventions in sequence.

Data availability

Codes used to produce the results presented herein, and related datasets, are available in a public GitHub repository³⁰.

Ethics statement

This study was conducted with anonymized secondary data, where only aggregated clinical data was used for model parameterization. Therefore, no approval from a Human Research Ethics Committee is required.

Effects of social distancing and governmental interventions in disease transmissibility can be observed shortly after onset

We started our analyses by assessing the effects in disease transmissibility that local non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI) have produced in the state, in its capital, as well as in the inland cities (all 417 municipalities in the state except the city of Salvador). For this, the model was fitted using the number of confirmed cases obtained by local authorities (Figure 2) and we estimated parameters related to the transmission rate (β₀, β₁), the timepoint in their change, and the factor that reduce the asymptomatic infectivity δ. It can be observed that the initial (pre-intervention) transmission rate was β₀ = 1:06 ([1.04 −1.07] 95% CI). A reduction of 38% on the transmission rate, yielding β₁ = 0:63 ([0.62, 0.65] 95% CI), is evidenced around March 30th (24 days after the first confirmed case in the state). In Salvador, the capital of the state (with a population of 2.6-million people), this reduction was of 52.4% (on March, 26th), while inland cities displayed a decrease of approximately 34% (on April, 1st). The factor that reduces the infectivity of the asymptomatic was determined to be δ = 0:62 ([0.60, 0.64] 95% CI) at the state-level, δ = 0:55 ([0.54, 0.56] 95% CI) in the capital and δ = 0:57 ([0.56, 0.58] 95% CI) in the inland cities. The basic reproduction numbers for Bahia, the capital and inland cities were respectively, of R₀ = 2:7 ([2.6 −2.8] 95% CI), 2:9 ([2.8 - 3.0] 95% CI) and 2:3 ([2.2 - 2.4] 95% CI).

These results show that the combined effects of changes in human behavior with governmental policies of movement restriction result in significant decreases in the transmissibility of the disease, as measured by the β parameter. However, these efforts are insufficient to curb the epidemic in the state, as the basic reproductive number exceeds 1, indicating a scenario of continuing growth of the epidemic.

Projecting hospitalization requirements in Bahia, Brazil: challenges for low-resource settings

Next, we evaluated the burden on hospitalization needs imposed by the COVID-19 epidemic at the state-level, as well as the effects that NPI strategies could have on these requirements. We also estimated the total number of deaths projected by the model in the absence and with the enforcement of distancing measures. Our results, presented in Figure 3 show that, in the absence of interventions, the state-level availability for clinical beds would be exhausted by April 22^nd. With the maintenance of the current level of interventions, this depletion is shifted in time and would occur by May 14^th. Analogously, the demand for ICU beds would exceed their capacity by April 23^rd in the absence of interventions, and by May 17^th with the current rate of interventions.

The real-world, state-level data obtained for May 4^th, the last day with available bed occupancy observations, shows that 240 (51.5%) clinical beds were occupied, while 176 (41.7%) ICU beds were in use. Our model-based analysis yields an increase in these numbers by 29 (7,153 places) and 31 (5,517 places) times if interventions had not been adopted in the state. On the other hand, the enforcement of measures decreased the number of cases and deaths by 20 and 14 times, respectively.

These results underscore the impact that the ongoing COVID-19 epidemic imposes on hospital resources, and eventually on deaths, and particularly explicits the challenges faced by countries with lesser-developed healthcare systems. Even if we consider overestimation of the prediction results, the simple doubling of the current real-world bed occupancy data would already result in exceeding the current availability of clinical and ICU beds in the state.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 2.

Projection of the the number of cases with a changing transmission rate (a) in Bahia; (b) in Salvador and (c) in the inland cities. The parameters κ = 1=4, p = 0:2, γ_a = 1=3:5, γ_s = 1=4 were fixed and h set to zero. The black dots correspond to the actual number of cases. The vertical dashed red lines are the dates of transition from β₀ to β₁. The blue dashed and full lines represent the evolution of the epidemic with a fixed transmission rate β₀ and with both β₀ and β₁, respectively.

The obtained ℛ₀ is as before and the effective reproductive number is presented in Figure 4. We can notice a trend of reduction on the effective reproductive number, although ℛ(t) is above one in almost the complete time series for the state of Bahia. Interestingly, our analysis of how asymptomatic individuals influence the course and dynamic of transmission revealed that these individuals contribute to an increase of 68.62% on the basic reproduction number.

A model-informed strategy of periodic interventions to reduce COVID-19 transmissibility as a cue to protect health systems

The previous results revealed the favorable effects of interventions that result in decreases in the disease transmission rate on shifting the peak of hospitalization saturation (complete occupancy of available beds), and in decreasing the number of cases and deaths. However, these results showed that complete saturation is inevitable under our local conditions. We next evaluated to what extent more vigorous restriction policies, and their duration/periodicity, would be useful in order to prevent the complete collapse of the state-level health system. To address this question, we used the described model to study the epidemic dynamics under various scenarios.

Initially, and in order to assert that disease transmissibility is the driving factor leading to increased hospitalization requirements, we considered a scenario where the transmission rate of asymptomatical individuals was increased by 50% starting on May 5^th (Figure 5). After 20 days, we noticed an increase of cumulative cases and deaths of, respectively, 50%, and 37%. Accordingly, clinical and ICU bed requirements increase by 114% and 100%, respectively. This scenario would be illustrative of a situation where the movement restriction of asymptomatic individuals is eased.

The previous results confirmed the importance of curbing disease transmissibility. Then, we turned to set targets that would allow for an increase in the protection of the health care system. These scenarios are illustrated in Table 1. We show that an intervention that reduces the transmission rate to 25%, enforced on May 5^th for 14 days, would not yield significant improvements, resulting in a gain of only 3 days until clinical beds collapse, and 10 days until ICU bed capacity is exhausted. Similar results can be achieved by a more punctual (7 days period), but more vigorous intervention reducing transmission rate by 50% (Table 1). More interestingly, a delay of about 40 days for clinical and ICU bed exhaustion can be achieved in a scenario where a 50% reduction on the transmission is sustained for 30 days, or when a 75% reduction is endured for 14 days (Supplementary Figure 1).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 3.

Effects of the implemented interventions on the (a) number of cases, (b) deaths, (c) clinical hospitalization and (d) ICU bed requirements at the state-level. The horizontal red dashed lines are, respectively, the current capacity for beds for clinical hospitalization (466 beds) and ICUs (422 beds). The non blue dashed and full lines represent the evolution of the epidemic with a fixed transmission rate β₀ and with both β₀ and β₁, respectively. The assumed parameter values are shown in Supplementary Table 1.

The timing of interventions is also crucial under our model. If a vigorous intervention is only adopted on the day when clinical bed occupancy reaches its maximum availability (on May 14^th), a time lag will be needed in order to allow for patient turnover in hospitals. Once occupancy is below the total availability, interventions can be continued or suspended. In the latter case, hospitalization requirements resumes its growth until reaching the health system’s capacity once again. Under this scenario, an intervention that reduces the transmission rate by 25% will not be enough to protect health resources, even if policies are maintained for long periods of time (Figure). Similar results are seen when we consider the reduction of the transmission rate by 50%, as shown in Table 2. Thus, harsher efforts to contain disease transmissibility, and for more extended periods, are necessary to allow for full recovery of the healthcare system.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 4.

Effective reproductive number, given by Equation (13) for (a) Bahia, (b) Salvador and (c) inland cities up to May 4^th, 2020. Black line represents the ℛ_t calculated with reported number of new cases; the blue dashed line represents the ℛ_t calculated with the new number of simulated cases obtained from the model. The black dots correspond to the actual number of cases (a), deaths (b), and hospital bed occupancy (c)-(d).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 5.

Effect of easing the social distancing for asymptomatic individuals in Bahia on the (a) number of cases, (b) deaths, (c) clinical hospitalization and (d) ICU bed requirements at the state-level. Here, the transmission rate of asymptomatic cases has been increased by 50%, by setting δ = 0.93. The black dots correspond to the actual number of cases (a), deaths (b), and hospital bed occupancy (c)-(d). The assumed parameter values are shown in Supplementary Table 1.

The previous results, combined, show that intense efforts to decrease COVID-19 transmissibility are needed in order to overcome a complete collapse of the health care system in a low-resource setting such as that encountered in Bahia, Brazil. Of note, under some of the presented scenarios full establishment of the hospitalization capacity may not be achieved if the timing to enforce more strict measures to decrease the transmission rate is not optimal. Accordingly, periodic interventions may be needed to control secondary waves of the outbreak. In Figure 6 we illustrate the behaviour of the spread dynamics of COVID-19 in Bahia if measures are periodically adopted.

Model sensitivity analysis

A sensitivity analysis was performed in order to evaluate the most influential parameters of the model (Figure 1 within Supplementary File 2). These results revealed that the factor that reduce the asymptomatic infectivity, δ, is among the most influential parameters to every model output during the whole period evaluated. Also, the transmission rate β was identified as exerting an important role for model output, as expected from our previous analyses. Particularly, during the first 30 days β₀ is the most important parameter in the system, as indicated by higher values of S_T (Figure 1 within Supplementary File 2). After this period, the importance of β₀ decreases as that of β₁ increases, eventually superseding the former as the most important parameter in the system. For H, U, and D, the most influential parameter during the initial stages of the simulation (before day 15) is the proportion of symptomatic needing hospitalization or ICU, h.