Suppr超能文献

系统评价比较非药物干预措施防治 COVID-19 有效性的实证研究。

Systematic review of empirical studies comparing the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions against COVID-19.

机构信息

Evidence-Based Public Health Unit, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Nordufer 20, Berlin 13353, Germany; Institute of Tropical Medicine and International Health, Charité University Berlin, Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Augustenburger Platz 1, Berlin 13353, Germany.

Evidence-Based Public Health Unit, Centre for International Health Protection, Robert Koch Institute, Nordufer 20, Berlin 13353, Germany.

出版信息

J Infect. 2021 Sep;83(3):281-293. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2021.06.018. Epub 2021 Jun 20.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate which non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) have been more and less effective in controlling the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of published and unpublished empirical studies, either observational or interventional, analysing the comparative effectiveness of NPIs against the COVID-19 pandemic. We searched Embase/Medline and medRxiv to identify the relevant literature.

RESULTS

We identified 34 studies. During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, school closing was the most effective NPI, followed by workplace closing, business and venue closing and public event bans. Public information campaigns and mask wearing requirements were also effective in controlling the pandemic while being less disruptive for the population than other NPIs. There was no evidence on the effectiveness of public transport closure, testing and contact tracing strategies and quarantining or isolation of individuals. Early implementation was associated with a higher effectiveness in reducing COVID-19 cases and deaths, while general stringency of the NPIs was not.

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review, we found that school closing, followed by workplace closing, business and venue closing and public event bans were the most effective NPIs in controlling the spread of COVID-19. An early response and a combination of specific social distancing measures are effective at reducing COVID-19 cases and deaths. Continuous monitoring of NPIs effectiveness is needed in order to adapt decision making.

摘要

目的

评估哪些非药物干预措施(NPIs)在控制 COVID-19 大流行方面更有效,哪些效果较差。

方法

我们对已发表和未发表的观察性或干预性实证研究进行了系统评价,分析了 NPIs 对 COVID-19 大流行的相对有效性。我们在 Embase/Medline 和 medRxiv 上进行了检索,以确定相关文献。

结果

我们共确定了 34 项研究。在 COVID-19 大流行的第一波期间,学校关闭是最有效的 NPI,其次是工作场所关闭、商业和场所关闭以及公共活动禁令。公众信息宣传活动和佩戴口罩要求在控制大流行方面也非常有效,而且对民众的干扰小于其他 NPI。没有证据表明关闭公共交通工具、检测和接触者追踪策略以及隔离或隔离个人的有效性。早期实施与降低 COVID-19 病例和死亡人数的更高有效性相关,而 NPI 的总体严格程度则没有。

结论

在这项系统评价中,我们发现学校关闭,其次是工作场所关闭、商业和场所关闭以及公共活动禁令,是控制 COVID-19 传播最有效的 NPI。早期应对和特定的社交距离措施的结合可有效降低 COVID-19 病例和死亡人数。需要不断监测 NPI 的有效性,以便调整决策。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b447/8214911/9d47ab766fa3/gr1_lrg.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验