Mass screening vs lockdown vs combination of both to control COVID-19: a systematic review

Date Icon Publish Date

ABSTRACT

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a global pandemic. Non-pharmacological interventions, such as lockdown and mass testing, remain as the mainstay of control measures for the outbreak. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of mass testing, lockdown, or a combination of both to control COVID-19 pandemic. A systematic search on 11 major databases was conducted on June 8, 2020. This review is registered in Prospero (CRD42020190546). We included primary studies written in English which investigate mass screening, lockdown, or a combination of both to control and/or mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic. There are four important outcomes as selected by WHO experts for their decision-making process: incident cases, onward transmission, mortality, and resource use. Among 623 studies, only 14 studies met our criteria. Four observational studies were rated as strong evidence and ten modelling studies were rated as moderate evidence. Based on one modelling study, mass testing reduced the total infected people compared to no mass testing. For lockdown, ten studies consistently showed that it successfully reduced the incidence, onward transmission, and mortality rate of COVID-19. A limited evidence showed that a combination of lockdown and mass screening resulted in a greater reduction of incidence and mortality rate compared to lockdown only. However, there is not enough evidence on the effectiveness of mass testing only.

 

Sabanur ÇAVDAR, Ayşe Zülal TOKAÇ, Ömer ATAÇ, Mehmet Akif SEZEROL, Yusuf TAŞÇI, Osman HAYRAN (2022)

Birinci Basamak Sağlık Çalışanlarında COVID-19 Görülme Sıklığı. Eskişehir Türk Dünyası Uygulama ve Araştırma Merkezi Halk Sağlığı Dergisi,
10.35232/estudamhsd.1012379

Tyler Shelby, Tyler Caruthers, Oren Y Kanner, Rebecca Schneider, Dana Lipnickas, Lauretta E Grau, Rajit Manohar, Linda Niccolai (2021)

Pilot Evaluations of Two Bluetooth Contact Tracing Approaches on a University Campus: Mixed Methods Study. JMIR Formative Research, 5(10), e31086.
10.2196/31086

Takuto Naito, Yasutake Tomata, Tatsui Otsuka, Kanami Tsuno, Takahiro Tabuchi (2022)

Did Children in Single-Parent Households Have a Higher Probability of Emotional Instability during the COVID-19 Pandemic? A Nationwide Cross-Sectional Study in Japan. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(7), 4239.
10.3390/ijerph19074239

Rujitika Mungmunpuntipantip, Viroj Wiwanitkit (2021)

Anxiety, Uncertainty, and Resilience During the Pandemic Period – Anthropological and Psychological Perspectives.
10.5772/intechopen.96496

Silvana Nair Leite, Jorge Antonio Zepeda Bermudez, Débora Melecchi, Adelir Rodrigues da Veiga, Ana Liani Beisl Oliveira, Artur Custódio Moreira de Sousa, Célia Machado Gervásio Chaves, Fernanda Manzini, Lidiane Silva Dutra, Luísa Arueira Chaves, Marco Aurélio Pereira, Maria Eufrásia Oliveira Lima, Moysés Longinho Toniolo, Ronald Ferreira dos Santos, Silvânia Dantas, Jorge Carlos Santos da Costa (2021)

Projeto Integra: fortalecimento da participação social na agenda das políticas, serviços e tecnologias em saúde. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, 26(11), 5589.
10.1590/1413-812320212611.18212021

 

Our most popular topics on Journal of Public Health Research

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.