Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Preliminary evaluation of voluntary event cancellation as a countermeasure against the COVID-19 outbreak in Japan as of 11 March, 2020

Yoshiyuki Sugishita, Junko Kurita, Tamie Sugawara, Yasushi Ohkusa
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.03.12.20035220
Yoshiyuki Sugishita
1National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Tokyo, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: yoshiyuk@gmail.com
Junko Kurita
2Center for Medical Sciences, Ibaraki Prefectural University of Health Sciences, Ibaraki, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Tamie Sugawara
1National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Tokyo, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Yasushi Ohkusa
1National Institute of Infectious Diseases, Tokyo, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background To control COVID-19 outbreak in Japan, sports and entertainment events were canceled in Japan for two weeks from 26 February to 11 March. It has been designated as voluntary event cancellation (VEC).

Object This study predicts the effectiveness of VEC enduring and after its implementation.

Method We applied a simple susceptible–infected–recovery model to data of patients with symptoms in Japan during 14 January to VEC introduction and after VEC introduction to 8 March. We adjusted the reporting delay in the latest few days.

Results Results suggest that the basic reproduction number, R0, before VEC introduced as 2.50 with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was [2.43, 2.55] and the effective reproduction number, Rv, after VEC introduced as 1. 88; its 95% CI was [1.68,2.02].

Discussion and Conclusion Results demonstrated that VEC can reduce COVID-19 infectiousness by 35%, but R0 remains higher than one.

Introduction

The initial case of COVID-19 in Japan was that of a patient returning from Wuhan, China who showed symptoms on 3 January, 2020. Subsequently, as of 11 March, 2020, 503 cases were announced, including asymptomatic or those abroad in countries such as China but excluding those infected on a large cruise ship, the Diamond Princess [1].

Sports and entertainment events were canceled in Japan for two weeks from 26 February to 11 March according to a government advisory. At the same time, it was advised that small business and private meetings be cancelled voluntarily. The policy is designated as voluntary event cancellation (VEC). Moreover, since 3 March, almost all schools have been closed to control the spread until early April. Although schoolchildren are not of pestiferous age, the policy effects remain unknown. These policies must be evaluated as soon as possible. If the effective reproduction number, Rv under these measures is less than one, the outbreak can be contained. Alternatively, even given a low R0 before these measures, if it was greater than one, it might prolong the outbreak. Nevertheless, one could expect to prevent some fatal cases over time by easing burdens on medical resources or developing a vaccine. The entire course of the outbreak might be altered if these measures were able to reduce infectiousness considerably. Therefore, evaluation of these measures must be thorough when these measures are commenced, continued, and ceased. The present study was conducted to evaluate VEC before VEC is cancelled so as to contribute government’s decision making whether VEC will be continued or ceased.

Method

We applied a simple susceptible–infected–recovery (SIR) model [2] to the data assuming an incubation period following its empirical distribution in the early stage of the outbreak in Japan. Experiences of Japanese people living in Wuhan until the outbreak provide information related to mild cases because complete laboratory surveillance was administered for them. During January 29 – February 17, 2020, 829 Japanese people returned to Japan from Wuhan. All had received a test to detect COVID-19; of them, 14 were found to be positive for COVID-19 [3]. Of those 14, 10 Japanese people had exhibited mild symptoms; the other 4 showed no symptom as of February 25. Moreover, two Japanese residents of Wuhan exhibited severe symptoms: one was confirmed as COVID-19. The other died, although no fatal case was confirmed as COVID-19 by testing. In addition, two Japanese residents of Wuhan with mild symptoms were refused re-entry to Japan even though they had not been confirmed as infected. If one assumes that the Japanese fatal case in Wuhan and that the two rejected re-entrants were infected with COVID-19, then 2 severe cases, 12 mild cases, and 4 asymptomatic cases were found to exist among these Japanese residents of Wuhan. We therefore apply these proportions to the simulation.

Assuming that the power of infectivity among severe patients and mild patients were equal among the asymptomatic cases, half of the symptomatic cases can be assumed. This assumption about relative infectiousness among asymptomatic cases compared with symptomatic cases was also assumed in simulation studies for influenza [4–8]. We sought R0 to fit the number of patients during 14 January – 28 February and to minimize the sum of absolute values of discrepancies among the reported numbers and the fitted values. Its 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated using the 10000 iterations of bootstrapping for empirical distribution.

We used data of the community outbreak of patients with COVID-19 who showed any symptom in Japan for 14 January – 8 March, 2020. During this period, 432 cases with onset dates occurred. We excluded some patients who had returned from China, and who were presumed to be infected persons from the Diamond Princess. They were presumed to be not community-acquired in Japan.

Published information about COVID-19 patients with symptoms from the Ministry of Labour, Health and Welfare (MLHW), Japan was usually adversely affected with some delay caused by uncertainty during onset to visiting a doctor or in the timing of a physician’s suspicion of COVID-19. Therefore, published data of patients must be adjust at least a few days. To adjust it, we applied the following regression. We denote Xt-k/t as the number of patients whose onset date was t-k published on day t. The dependent variables are the degree of reporting delay, Xt-k-m/t / Xt-k-m/t-m, where k>m in several m and k. Here, m denotes the difference of the publishing dates between the two published. Date t represents the publishing date of the latest publishing. The explanatory variables were 1/k, 1/m, and 1/km. The degree of reporting delay was estimated as [estimated coefficient of constant term] + [estimated coefficient of 1/k]/k, when m was sufficiently large and time had passed. Therefore, this estimated degree of reporting delay multiplied by the latest published data are expected to be predictions of the number of patients whose onset date was t-k. We used this adjusted number of patients in the latest few days including those after VEC was adopted. We used the published data on 2,5,6, 9,10, 11 and 12 March,2020 by MLHW[1].

First, we estimated R0 in Japan to fit the data of community outbreak before VEC was introduced. Then, using the adjusted data of patients, we estimated Rv after VEC was adopted.

Results

During 14 January – 8 March in Japan, 412 community-acquired cases were identified for whom the onset date was published. Figure 1 showed the empirical distribution of incubation period among 59 cases whose exposed date and onset date were published by MHLW. Its mode was six days and average was 6.6 days.

Figure 1:
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
Figure 1: Epirical distributionof incubation period published by Ministry of Labour, Health and Welfare, Japan

(number of patients)

Notes: Bars indicates the number of patients by incubation period among 59 cases whose exposed date and onset date were published by Ministry of Labour, Health and Welfare, Japan.

Figure 2 depicts the epidemic curves published at 3, 5, 6, 9 and 10 March. From this information, we estimated the degree of reporting delay. Those results are presented in Table 1. The table shows that 1/k, 1/m and 1/km are all significant. When m is sufficiently large, the effects of 1/m and 1/km converge to zero. Therefore, the estimated degree of reporting delay consists of the term of 1/k and a constant term. Based on these results, we predict the degrees of reporting delay as 17.3 for k=1, 8.72 for k=2, 5.84 for k=3, and so on.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 1:

Estimation results of the degree of reporting delay

Figure 2:
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
Figure 2: Predicted epidemic curve of COVID-19 patients with/without voluntary event cancellation in Japan and its 95% confidence interval.

(million patients)

Note: The black bold line represents the epidemic curve based on the estimated Rv with event cancellation countermeasures. Its 95% confidence interval (CI) is shown by the black thin lines. Gray lines represent the epidemic curves based on R0 without event cancellation countermeasures; its 95% CI is shown by gray thin lines.

The value of R0 before VEC introduced was estimated as 2.50. Its 95% CI was [2.43, 2.55]. However, Rv after VEC was introduced was estimated as 1.88; its 95% CI was [1.68,2.02].

Figure 3 depicts the entire predicted epidemic curve based on R0 and Rv and its 95% CI. The peak without VEC is estimated as being reached on 9 June with 2.78 million newly diagnosed patients with symptoms. The 95% CI peak dates are predicted as 7–12 June, with respective maximum numbers of patients with symptoms per day estimated respectively as [2.63, 2.89]. Under VEC, the peak occurred on 31 July [14 July, 9 September]. The maximum newly diagnosed patients with symptoms were 1.36[0.888, 1.69] million. In all, 81.5[80.3, 82.3] million patients showed symptoms under R0 and65.3[55.8, 70.3] million under Rv. Particularly, the maximum number of inpatients was estimated as 3.63 [3.43, 3.76] million under R0 and 1.79 [1.18, 222] million under Rv.

Discussion

We applied a simple SIR model including asymptomatic cases that had not been incorporated into the model to date. An earlier study [9] estimated R0 for COVID-19 as 2.24–3.58 in Wuhan. Our R0 obtained before VEC was similar.

However, Rv after VEC introduced was 35% reduction from R0. Actually, VEC can reduce the COVID-19 infectiousness by 35%. Even was after being reduced, it was higher than one. Therefore, VEC cannot contain the COVID-19 outbreak in Japan completely. The period of outbreak might be prolonged if VEC can be continued until the outbreak ceased. However, the maximum number of inpatients with VEC was lower than that without VEC by 70%. Therefore, we can expect mortality to be reduced because of the depletion of medical resources.

Nevertheless, the cost attributable to VEC must be considered. It is necessary to prove that the benefit attributable to reduction in patients and in mortality cases is greater than the cost of VEC. Such calculations remain as a subject for further research.

Conclusion

Results demonstrated that VEC can reduce infectiousness of COVID-19 by 35%, although the R0 remains greater than one. The peak number of cases obtained in our simulation was decreased by about one third compared to the peak obtained without adoption of VEC. Moreover, the peak was delayed from occurring.

VEC had been extended until March 19 on March 10. We hope that the present study contribute government’s decision making for VEC. Results of the present study support the author opinions, but do not reflect any stance or policy of professionally affiliated bodies.

Data Availability

All data are fully available without restriction.

https://www.mhlw.go.jp/stf/houdou/houdou_list_202001.html.

Reference

  1. 1.↵
    Japan Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. Press Releases. h abroad such as China (in Japanese) [accessed on 12 March, 2020]
  2. 2.↵
    Japan Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. Press Releases. https://www.mhlw.go.jp/stf/houdou/houdou_list_202001.html. (in Japanese) [accessed on 12 March, 2020]
  3. 3.↵
    Ohkusa Y, Sugawara T, Taniguchi K, Okabe N. Real-time estimation and prediction for pandemic A/H1N1(2009) in Japan. J Infect Chemother. 2011;17:468–72.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    Ferguson NM, Cummings DA, Cauchemez S, Fraser C, Riley S, Meeyai A, et al. : Strategies for containing an emerging influenza pandemic in Southeast Asia. Nature 2005; 437:209–214.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  5. 5.
    Longini IM Jr., Nizam A, Xu S, Ungchusak K, Hanshaoworakul W, Cummings DA, Halloran ME: Containing Pandemic Influenza at the Source. Science 2005; 309:1083–1087.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.
    Germann TC, Kadau L, Longini IM Jr., Macken CA: Mitigation strategies for pandemic influenza in the United States. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2006; 103: 5935–5940.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.
    Ferguson NM, Cummings DA, Fraser C, Cajka JC, Cooley PC, Burke DS: Strategies for mitigating an influenza pandemic. Nature 2006; 442: 448–452.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  8. 8.↵
    Ohkusa Y, Sugawara T: Simulation Model of Pandemic influenza in the Whole of Japan, Journal of Japanese Infectious Disease 2009; 62:98–106.
    OpenUrl
  9. 9.↵
    Zhao S, Lin Q, Ran J, Musa SS, Yang G, Wang W, Lou Y, Gao D, Yang L, He D, Wang M. Preliminary Estimation of the Basic Reproduction Number of Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in China, From 2019 to 2020: A Data-Driven Analysis in the Early Phase of the Outbreak. Int J Infect Dis 2020[Online ahead of print]
  10. 10.
    Liu Y, Gayle AA, Wilder-Smith A, Rockly J. The reproductive number of COVID-19 is higher compared to SARS coronavirus. J Travel Med. 2020.DOI: 10.1093/jtm/taaa021
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.
    Lai C, Shih T, Ko W, Tang H, Hsueh P. Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19): The Epidemic and the Challenges. Int J Antimicrob Agents. DOI:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2020.105924
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted March 16, 2020.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Preliminary evaluation of voluntary event cancellation as a countermeasure against the COVID-19 outbreak in Japan as of 11 March, 2020
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Preliminary evaluation of voluntary event cancellation as a countermeasure against the COVID-19 outbreak in Japan as of 11 March, 2020
Yoshiyuki Sugishita, Junko Kurita, Tamie Sugawara, Yasushi Ohkusa
medRxiv 2020.03.12.20035220; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.03.12.20035220
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Preliminary evaluation of voluntary event cancellation as a countermeasure against the COVID-19 outbreak in Japan as of 11 March, 2020
Yoshiyuki Sugishita, Junko Kurita, Tamie Sugawara, Yasushi Ohkusa
medRxiv 2020.03.12.20035220; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.03.12.20035220

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Epidemiology
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (180)
  • Allergy and Immunology (435)
  • Anesthesia (99)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (949)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (178)
  • Dermatology (111)
  • Emergency Medicine (260)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (423)
  • Epidemiology (9018)
  • Forensic Medicine (4)
  • Gastroenterology (422)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (1964)
  • Geriatric Medicine (191)
  • Health Economics (405)
  • Health Informatics (1333)
  • Health Policy (662)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (522)
  • Hematology (212)
  • HIV/AIDS (420)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (10832)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (576)
  • Medical Education (200)
  • Medical Ethics (54)
  • Nephrology (223)
  • Neurology (1842)
  • Nursing (110)
  • Nutrition (274)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (358)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (470)
  • Oncology (1006)
  • Ophthalmology (299)
  • Orthopedics (111)
  • Otolaryngology (184)
  • Pain Medicine (126)
  • Palliative Medicine (45)
  • Pathology (267)
  • Pediatrics (583)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (276)
  • Primary Care Research (234)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (1910)
  • Public and Global Health (4137)
  • Radiology and Imaging (678)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (370)
  • Respiratory Medicine (551)
  • Rheumatology (226)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (191)
  • Sports Medicine (178)
  • Surgery (207)
  • Toxicology (39)
  • Transplantation (110)
  • Urology (82)