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

Social distancing to slow the U.S. COVID-19 epidemic: longitudinal pretest-posttest comparison group study

Mark J. Siedner, Guy Harling, Zahra Reynolds, Rebecca F. Gilbert, Sebastien Haneuse, Atheendar S. Venkataramani, Alexander C. Tsai
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.03.20052373
Mark J. Siedner
1Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
2Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
3Africa Health Research Institute, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: msiedner@mgh.harvard.edu
Guy Harling
3Africa Health Research Institute, KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa
4University College London, London, UK
5MRC/Wits Rural Public Health & Health Transitions Research Unit (Agincourt), University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa
6Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, United States
7Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies, Cambridge, MA, United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Zahra Reynolds
1Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Rebecca F. Gilbert
1Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Sebastien Haneuse
8Department of Biostatistics, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Atheendar S. Venkataramani
9Department of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States
10Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alexander C. Tsai
1Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
2Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
7Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies, Cambridge, MA, United States
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background Social distancing measures to address the U.S. coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic may have notable health and social impacts.

Methods and Findings We conducted a longitudinal pretest-posttest comparison group study to estimate the change in COVID-19 case growth before versus after implementation of statewide social distancing measures in the U.S. The primary exposure was time before (14 days prior to, and up to 3 days after) versus after (beginning 4 days after, and up to 21 days after) implementation of the first statewide social distancing measures. Statewide restrictions on internal movement were examined as a secondary exposure. The primary outcome was the COVID-19 case growth rate. The secondary outcome was the COVID-19-attributed mortality growth rate. All states initiated social distancing measures between March 10-25, 2020. The mean daily COVID-19 case growth rate decreased beginning four days after implementation of the first statewide social distancing measures, by 0.9% per day (95% confidence interval [CI], −1.3% to −0.4%; P<0.001). We did not estimate a statistically significant difference in the mean daily case growth rate before versus after implementation of statewide restrictions on internal movement (0.1% per day; 95% CI, −0.04% to 0.3%, P=0.14), but there is significant difficulty in disentangling the unique associations with statewide restrictions on internal movement from the unique associations with the first social distancing measures. Beginning seven days after social distancing, the COVID-19-attributed mortality growth rate decreased by 1.7% per day (95% CI, −3.0% to −0.7%; P<0.001). Our analysis is susceptible to potential bias resulting from the aggregate nature of the ecological data, potential confounding by contemporaneous changes (e.g., increases in testing), and potential underestimation of social distancing due to spillovers across neighboring states.

Conclusions Statewide social distancing measures were associated with a decrease in the COVID-19 epidemic case growth rate that was statistically significant and a decrease in the COVID-19-attributed mortality growth rate that was not statistically significant.

Why was the study done There are few empirical data about the population health benefits of imposing statewide social distancing measures to reduce transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, which causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

What did the researchers find We compared data from each state before vs. after implementation of statewide social distancing measures to estimate changes in mean COVID-19 daily case growth rates. Growth rates declined by approximately 1% per day beginning four days (approximately one incubation period) after statewide social distancing measures were implemented. Stated differently, our model implies that social distancing reduced the total number of COVID-19 cases by approximately 1,600 reported cases at 7 days after implementation, by approximately reported 55,000 cases at 14 days after implementation, and by approximately reported 600,000 cases at 21 days after implementation.

What do these findings mean Statewide social distancing measures were associated with a reduction in the growth rate of COVID-19 cases in the U.S. However, our analysis is susceptible to potential bias resulting from the aggregate nature of the data, potential confounding by other changes that occurred during the study period (e.g., increases in testing), and potential underestimation of social distancing due to spillovers across neighboring states.

Competing Interest Statement

ACT receives a stipend as a Specialty Consulting Editor for PLOS Medicine and serves on the journal's editorial board. All other authors declare no competing interests.

Funding Statement

Sir Henry Dale Fellowship, Wellcome Trust (UK); Sullivan Family Foundation

Author Declarations

All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.

Yes

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Yes

I 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).

Yes

I 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.

Yes

Footnotes

  • Competing interests: ACT receives a stipend as a Specialty Consulting Editor for PLOS Medicine and serves on the journal’s editorial board. All other authors declare no competing interests.

  • Funding Source: Sir Henry Dale Fellowship, Wellcome Trust (UK); Sullivan Family Foundation

Data Availability

All data will be available through public databases and the supplementary materials.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted June 20, 2020.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

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.
Social distancing to slow the U.S. COVID-19 epidemic: longitudinal pretest-posttest comparison group study
(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
Social distancing to slow the U.S. COVID-19 epidemic: longitudinal pretest-posttest comparison group study
Mark J. Siedner, Guy Harling, Zahra Reynolds, Rebecca F. Gilbert, Sebastien Haneuse, Atheendar S. Venkataramani, Alexander C. Tsai
medRxiv 2020.04.03.20052373; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.03.20052373
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
Social distancing to slow the U.S. COVID-19 epidemic: longitudinal pretest-posttest comparison group study
Mark J. Siedner, Guy Harling, Zahra Reynolds, Rebecca F. Gilbert, Sebastien Haneuse, Atheendar S. Venkataramani, Alexander C. Tsai
medRxiv 2020.04.03.20052373; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.03.20052373

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

  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS)
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (174)
  • Allergy and Immunology (421)
  • Anesthesia (97)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (901)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (170)
  • Dermatology (102)
  • Emergency Medicine (257)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (407)
  • Epidemiology (8786)
  • Forensic Medicine (4)
  • Gastroenterology (405)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (1863)
  • Geriatric Medicine (179)
  • Health Economics (388)
  • Health Informatics (1292)
  • Health Policy (644)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (491)
  • Hematology (207)
  • HIV/AIDS (394)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (10563)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (564)
  • Medical Education (193)
  • Medical Ethics (52)
  • Nephrology (218)
  • Neurology (1755)
  • Nursing (103)
  • Nutrition (266)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (343)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (461)
  • Oncology (965)
  • Ophthalmology (283)
  • Orthopedics (107)
  • Otolaryngology (176)
  • Pain Medicine (118)
  • Palliative Medicine (43)
  • Pathology (264)
  • Pediatrics (557)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (265)
  • Primary Care Research (219)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (1844)
  • Public and Global Health (3985)
  • Radiology and Imaging (655)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (344)
  • Respiratory Medicine (535)
  • Rheumatology (215)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (178)
  • Sports Medicine (166)
  • Surgery (197)
  • Toxicology (37)
  • Transplantation (106)
  • Urology (80)