RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Mitigating outbreaks in congregate settings by decreasing the size of the susceptible population
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.07.05.21260043
DO 10.1101/2021.07.05.21260043
A1 Blumberg, Seth
A1 Lu, Phoebe
A1 Hoover, Christopher M.
A1 Lloyd-Smith, James O.
A1 Kwan, Ada T.
A1 Sears, David
A1 Bertozzi, Stefano M.
A1 Worden, Lee
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/07/07/2021.07.05.21260043.abstract
AB While many transmission models have been developed for community spread of respiratory pathogens, less attention has been given to modeling the interdependence of disease introduction and spread seen in congregate settings, such as prisons or nursing homes. As demonstrated by the explosive outbreaks of COVID-19 seen in congregate settings, the need for effective outbreak prevention and mitigation strategies for these settings is critical. Here we consider how interventions that decrease the size of the susceptible populations, such as vaccination or depopulation, impact the expected number of infections due to outbreaks. Introduction of disease into the resident population from the community is modeled as a branching process, while spread between residents is modeled via a compartmental model. Control is modeled as a proportional decrease in both the number of susceptible residents and the reproduction number. We find that vaccination or depopulation can have a greater than linear effect on anticipated infections. For example, assuming a reproduction number of 3.0 for density-dependent COVID-19 transmission, we find that reducing the size of the susceptible population by 20% reduced overall disease burden by 47%. We highlight the California state prison system as an example for how these findings provide a quantitative framework for implementing infection control in congregate settings. Additional applications of our modeling framework include optimizing the distribution of residents into independent residential units, and comparison of preemptive versus reactive vaccination strategies.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementSB, CMH, and PL were supported by CDC U01CK000590, as part of the Modeling Infectious Diseases in Healthcare Network. LW was supported by NIH R01GM130900. SMB, ATK, DS, LW receive funding from the Officer of the Federal Receiver which oversees the delivery of healthcare services in the California state prison system. All authors retained full independence in data analysis and in the interpretation of the results.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:This study is exempt from IRB oversight because no identifiable data was included in the analysis.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data sources are publicly available, as indicated in the methods section https://github.com/uclalawcovid19behindbars/data https://phoebelu.shinyapps.io/DepopulationModels/ https://github.com/proctor-ucsf/Transmission-in-congregate-settings