Abstract
Background In early May 2020, following social distancing measures due to COVID-19, governments consider relaxing lock-down. We combined individual clinical risk predictions with epidemic modelling to examine simulations of risk-based differential isolation and exit policies.
Methods We extended a standard susceptible-exposed-infected-removed (SEIR) model to account for personalised predictions of severity, defined by the risk of an individual needing intensive care if infected, and simulated differential isolation policies using COVID-19 data and estimates in France as of early May 2020. We also performed sensitivity analyses. The framework may be used with other epidemic models, with other risk predictions, and for other epidemic outbreaks.
Findings Simulations indicated that, assuming everything else the same, an exit policy considering clinical risk predictions starting on May 11, as planned by the French government, could enable to immediately relax restrictions for an extra 10% (6 700 000 people) or more of the lowest-risk population, and consequently relax the restrictions on the remaining population significantly faster - while abiding to the current ICU capacity. Similar exit policies without risk predictions would exceed the ICU capacity by a multiple. Sensitivity analyses showed that when the assumed percentage of severe patients among the population decreased, or the prediction model discrimination improved, or the ICU capacity increased, policies based on risk models had a greater impact on the results of epidemic simulations. At the same time, sensitivity analyses also showed that differential isolation policies require the higher risk individuals to comply with recommended restrictions. In general, our simulations demonstrated that risk prediction models could improve policy effectiveness, keeping everything else constant.
Interpretation Clinical risk prediction models can inform new personalised isolation and exit policies, which may lead to both safer and faster outcomes than what can be achieved without such prediction models.
Funding No funding was used for this research.
Evidence before this study Several countries have implemented non-pharmaceutical interventions based on social distancing and isolation measures in order to limit the spread of COVID-19. There has been limited differentiation in the degree of isolation measures, except for those critical for the functioning of the healthcare system and other key services. There is limited evidence about the impact of relaxing these measures as this has happened only recently and in only a few countries. Investigating the potential impact of differential restrictions depending on medical factors, such as the risk of severe symptoms if infected by Sars-Cov-2, may inform policies for imposing or relaxing isolation policies when these are considered.
Added value of this study This study investigates incorporating clinical risk predictions in epidemic models, allowing to explore isolation policies that consider individual clinical risks using simulations.
Implications of all the available evidence Epidemic simulations of isolation policies that consider predicted clinical risks in order to differentiate restrictions indicate the feasibility of policies that may be otherwise impossible to implement without undertaking this type of risk-based approach.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No funding was used for this research.
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
† Email addresses: mathilde.fekom{at}ens-paris-saclay.fr (Mathilde Fekom), anton.ovchinnikov{at}queensu.ca, (Anton Ovchinnikov), raphael.porcher{at}aphp.fr (Raphael Porcher), camille.pouchol{at}parisdescartes.fr (Camille Pouchol), nicolas.vayatis{at}ens-paris-saclay.fr (Nicolas Vayatis)
Data Availability
No data. Code is available at https://reine.cmla.ens-cachan.fr/boulant/seair
