RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 On the effectiveness of COVID-19 restrictions and lockdowns: Pan metron ariston
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2021.07.06.21260077
DO 10.1101/2021.07.06.21260077
A1 Leonidas Spiliopoulos
YR 2021
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/07/07/2021.07.06.21260077.abstract
AB I examine the dynamics of confirmed case (and death) growth rates conditional on different levels of severity in implemented NPIs, the mobility of citizens and other non restrictive policies. To account for the endogeneity of many of these variables, and the possibility of correlated latent (unobservable) country characteristics, I estimate a four structural model of the evolution of case growth rates, death growth rates, average changes in mobility and the determination of the severity of NPIs. There are strongly decreasing returns to the stringency of NPIs, especially for extreme lockdowns, as no significant improvement in the main outcome measures is found beyond NPIs corresponding to a Stringency Index range of 51–60 for cases and 41–50 for deaths. A non-restrictive policy of extensive and open testing has half of the impact on pandemic dynamics as the optimal NPIs, with none of the associated social and economic costs resulting from the latter. Decreases in mobility were found to increase, rather than decrease case growth rates, consistent with arguments that within-household transmission–resulting from spending more time at residences due to mobility restrictions–may outweigh the benefits of reduced community transmission. Vaccinations led to a fall in case and death growth rates, however the effect size must be re-evaluated when more data becomes available. Governments conditioned policy choice on recent pandemic dynamics, and were found to de-escalate the associated stringency of implemented NPIs more cautiously than in their escalation, i.e., policy mixes exhibited significant hysteresis. Finally, at least 90% of the maximum effectiveness of NPIs can be achieved by policies with an average Stringency index of 31–40, without restricting internal movement or imposing stay at home measures, and only recommending (not enforcing) closures on workplaces and schools, accompanied by public informational campaigns. Consequently, the positive effects on case and death growth rates of voluntary behavioral changes in response to beliefs about the severity of the pandemic, generally trumped those arising from mandatory behavioral restrictions. The exception being more stringent mandatory restrictions on gatherings and international movement, which were found to be effective. The findings suggest that further work should be directed at re-evaluating the effectiveness of NPIs, particularly towards empirically determining the optimal policy mix and associated stringency of individual NPIs.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementNo external funding was received.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:No IRB approval was necessary as all data is publicly available.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.YesThe data is freely available from the following online repositories: Covid-19 Data Hub Guidotti E and Ardia D. COVID-19 Data Hub. Journal of Open Source Software 2020; 5 (51)2376 34. Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker Hale T, Angrist N, Goldszmidt R, Kira B, Petherick A, Phillips T, Webster S, Cameron-Blake E, Hallas L, Majumdar S and Tatlow H. A global panel database of pandemic policies (Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker). Nature Human Behaviour 2021 35. Google Community Mobility Report Google LLC. Google COVID-19 Community Mobility Reports 2020. Available from: https://www.google.com/covid19/mobility/