1. COVID-19 hotspots through clusters analysis in France (may–October 2020): where should we track the virus to mitigate the spread?
- Author
-
Guillaume Spaccaferri, Clémentine Calba, Pascal Vilain, Loïc Garras, Cécile Durand, Corinne Pilorget, Nahida Atiki, Pascale Bernillon, Laëtitia Bosc, Erica Fougère, Jean-Baptiste Hanon, Valérie Henry, Caroline Huchet-Kervella, Mélanie Martel, Valérie Pontiès, Damien Mouly, Enguerrand Rolland du Roscoat, Stéphane Le Vu, Jean-Claude Desenclos, Anne Laporte, Regional MONIC group, and Patrick Rolland
- Subjects
COVID-19 ,Hotspots ,Clusters ,Descriptive analysis ,Criticality ,Public health ,Public aspects of medicine ,RA1-1270 - Abstract
Abstract Background In France, the lifting of the lockdown implemented to control the COVID-19 first wave in 2020 was followed by a reinforced contact-tracing (CT) strategy for the early detection of cases and transmission chains. We developed a reporting system of clusters defined as at least three COVID-19 cases, within seven days and belonging to the same community or having participated in the same gathering, whether they know each other or not. The aim of this study was to describe the typology and criticality of clusters reported between the two lockdowns in France to guide future action prioritisation. Methods In this study we describe the typology and criticality of COVID-19 clusters between the two lockdowns implemented in France (between May and end of October 2020). Clusters were registered in a national database named “MONIC” (MONItoring des Clusters), established in May 2020. This surveillance system identified the most affected communities in a timely manner. A level of criticality was defined for each cluster to take into consideration the risk of spreading within and outside the community of occurrence, and the health impact within the community. We compared the level of criticality according to the type of community in which the cluster occurred using Pearson’s chi-square tests. Results A total of 7236 clusters were reported over the study period, particularly in occupational environment (25.1%, n = 1813), elderly care structures (21.9%, n = 1586), and educational establishments (15.9%, n = 1154). We show a shift over time of the most affected communities in terms of number of clusters. Clusters reported in occupational environment and the personal sphere had increased during summer while clusters reported in educational environment increased after the start of the school year. This trend mirrors change of transmission pattern overtime according to social contacts. Among all reported clusters, 43.1% had a high level of criticality with significant differences between communities (p
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF