Heinz College, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States of America.
International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), Laxenburg, Austria.
PLoS One. 2020 Dec 2;15(12):e0243413. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0243413. eCollection 2020.
Nations struggled to decide when and how to end COVID-19 inspired lockdowns, with sharply divergent views between those arguing for a resumption of economic activity and those arguing for continuing the lockdown in some form. We examine the choice between continuing or ending a full lockdown within a simple optimal control model that encompasses both health and economic outcomes, and pays particular attention to when need for care exceeds hospital capacity. The model shows that very different strategies can perform similarly well and even both be optimal for the same relative valuation on work and life because of the presence of a so-called Skiba threshold. Qualitatively the alternate strategies correspond to trying essentially to eradicate the virus or merely to flatten the curve so fewer people urgently need healthcare when hospitals are already filled to capacity.
各国在何时以及如何结束新冠疫情封锁政策的问题上举棋不定，一些人主张恢复经济活动，而另一些人则主张以某种形式继续封锁。我们在一个简单的最优控制模型中研究了继续或结束全面封锁的选择，该模型涵盖了健康和经济结果，并特别关注当护理需求超过医院容量时的情况。该模型表明，非常不同的策略可以表现得同样出色，甚至对于工作和生活的相同相对价值，两者都是最优的，这是因为存在所谓的 Skiba 阈值。从定性上看，替代策略本质上是试图消灭病毒，或者仅仅是使曲线变平，以便当医院已经满负荷运转时，紧急需要医疗保健的人减少。
