PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Ralph Catalano
AU  - M. Maria Glymour
AU  - Yea-Hung Chen
AU  - Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo
TI  - Sheltering in place and the likelihood of non-natural death
AID  - 10.1101/2020.12.15.20248261
DP  - 2020 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2020.12.15.20248261
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/12/16/2020.12.15.20248261.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/12/16/2020.12.15.20248261.full
AB  - Increasing hospitalizations for COVID-19 in the United States (US) and elsewhere have ignited debate over whether to reinstate shelter-in-place policies adopted early in the pandemic to slow the spread of infection. The debate includes claims that sheltering in place influences deaths unrelated to infection or other natural causes. Testing this claim should improve the benefit/cost accounting that presumably informs the decision of whether to reimpose sheltering in place. To distinguish effects of shelter-in-place policies from other events in the pandemic, we compare experiences in two large US states with markedly different policies. We use time-series methods to compare temporal variation in non-natural deaths in California to that in Florida. California was the first state to begin and among the last to end sheltering in place while sheltering began later and ended earlier in Florida. We find that during weeks when California had shelter-in-place orders in effect, but Florida did not, the odds that a non-natural death occurred in California rather than Florida fell 14.8% below values expected from history. These results suggest that sheltering-in-place policies reduce mortality from mechanisms unrelated to infection or other natural causes of death.Significance Statement We address what has become an unusually important, but contentious, question – Did mandated sheltering in place affect the incidence of non-natural death in the United States? We use time-series methods to exploit a “natural experiment” in which California and Florida imposed and relaxed stay-at-home orders at different times. We find that shelter-in-place orders likely reduced non-natural mortality. We argue that ignoring averted non-natural deaths will lead not only to an underestimate of the benefits of the shelter-in-place policies, but also to an undercount of the impact of COVID-19 infections on natural deaths.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical Protocols https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Weekly-Counts-of-Deaths-by-State-and-Select-Causes/muzy-jte6) Funding StatementNo FundingAuthor 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:IRB exempt; uses only state-level vital statisticsAll 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).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.YesAll data used in these analyses can be accessed at publicly available websites cited in the manuscript.