PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Matt J. Keeling AU - Glen Guyver-Fletcher AU - Alex Holmes AU - Louise Dyson AU - Michael J. Tildesley AU - Edward M. Hill AU - Graham F. Medley TI - Precautionary breaks: planned, limited duration circuit breaks to control the prevalence of COVID-19 AID - 10.1101/2020.10.13.20211813 DP - 2020 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2020.10.13.20211813 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/10/14/2020.10.13.20211813.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/10/14/2020.10.13.20211813.full AB - The COVID-19 pandemic in the UK has been characterised by periods of exponential growth and decline, as different non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) are brought into play. During the early uncontrolled phase of the outbreak (early March 2020) there was a period of prolonged exponential growth with epidemiological observations such as hospitalisation doubling every 3-4 days (growth rate r ≈ 0.2). The enforcement of strict lockdown measures led to a noticeable decline in all epidemic quantities (r ≈ −0.06) that slowed during the summer as control measures were relaxed (r ≈ −0.02). Since August, infections, hospitalisations and deaths have been rising (precise estimation of the current growth rate is difficult due to extreme regional heterogeneity and temporal lags between the different epidemiological observations) and various NPIs have been applied locally throughout the UK in response.Controlling any rise in infection is a compromise between public health and societal costs, with more stringent NPIs reducing cases but damaging the economy and restricting freedoms. Currently, NPI imposition is made in response to the epidemiological state, are of indefinite length and are often imposed at short notice, greatly increasing the negative impact. An alternative approach is to consider planned, limited duration periods of strict NPIs aiming to purposefully reduce prevalence before such emergency NPIs are required. These “precautionary breaks” may offer a means of keeping control of the epidemic, while their fixed duration and the forewarning may limit their society impact. Here, using simple analysis and age-structured models matched to the unfolding UK epidemic, we investigate the action of precautionary breaks. In particular we consider their impact on the prevalence of infection, as well as the total number of predicted hospitalisations and deaths. We find that precautionary breaks provide the biggest gains when the growth rate is low, but offer a much needed brake on increasing infection when the growth rate is higher, potentially allowing other measures (such as contact tracing) to regain control.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work has been supported by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council through the MathSys CDT [grant number EP/S022244/1] and by the Medical Research Council through the COVID-19 Rapid Response Rolling Call [grant number MR/V009761/1]. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.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:Data from the CHESS database were supplied after anonymisation under strict data protection protocols agreed between the University of Warwick and Public Health England. The ethics of the use of these data for these purposes was agreed by Public Health England with the Government's SPI-M(O) / SAGE committees.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.YesData on cases were obtained from the COVID-19 Hospitalisation in England Surveillance System (CHESS) data set that collects detailed data on patients infected with COVID-19. Data on COVID-19 deaths were obtained from Public Health England. These data contain confidential information, with public data deposition non-permissible for socioeconomic reasons. The CHESS data resides with the National Health Service (www.nhs.gov.uk) whilst the death data are available from Public Health England (www.phe.gov.uk).