Nonpharmaceutical interventions in Turkey and worldwide during COVID-19 pandemic

Abstract: Nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) are actions apart from getting vaccinated and medications, in order to promote deceleration of the spread of illness among people and communities during pandemic. In this article, we aim to examine NPIs applied in Turkey and worldwide due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Some of the NPIs such as isolation, quarantine, and contact tracing were maintained with updates of the Ministry of Health guidelines in Turkey. Some NPIs including travel and partial or full curfew mobilization restrictions were set in accordance with the various periods by the number of cases. Periods of restrictions at autumn 2021 to summer 2022 are national partial curfews, national extended curfews, local decision-making phase, revised local decision-making phase, partial lockdown, full lockdown and gradual normalization. Mitigation and suppression have been implemented in Turkey with restrictions of varying severity throughout the course of the epidemic. It is seen that the restrictions implemented in Turkey contributed to the flattening of the epidemic curve. Even some countries mainly applied the suppression method, and others applied the mitigation method, in general, it is seen that similar methods were applied with different weights. Examples of different countries demonstrated that NPIs are effective for flattening epidemic curve. NPI have been the main instrument for a year and a half from the beginning of the epidemic to mid-2021 in Turkey as well as worldwide.Key words: Nonpharmaceutical interventions, COVID-19, pandemic, public health, Turkey

PDF

___

1. Ferguson N, Laydon D, Gilani GN, Natsuko I, Kylie A et al. Report 9: Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to reduce COVID-19 mortality and healthcare demand. 2021. doi: 10.25561/77482
2. Kayı İ, Sakarya S. Policy analysis of suppression and mitigation strategies in the management of an outbreak through the example of COVID-19 pandemic. Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology 2020;2(1):30-41. doi: 10.36519/ idcm.2020.0009
3. Contact tracing in the context of COVID-19. In: WHO, editor.: World Health Organization; 2021.
4. Keskinkiliç B, Shaikh I, Tekin A, Ursu P, Mardinoglu A, Mese E.A. A Resilient Health System in Response to Coronavirus Disease 2019: Experiences of Turkey. Frontiers in Public Health. 2020;8:577021. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.577021
5. COVID-19 Temaslı Takibi, Salgın Yönetimi, Evde Hasta İzlemi ve Filyasyon, 4 Mayıs 2021. T.C Sağlık Bakanlığı.
6. Şimşek AÇ, Kara A, Baran-Aksakal FN, Gülüm M, İlter B et al. Contact tracing management of the COVID-19 pandemic. Türk Hijyen ve Deneysel Biyoloji Dergisi. 2020;269. doi: 10.5505/TurkHijyen.2020.80688
7. Abdullah U, Arslan Ş, Manap HS, Gürkan T, Çalışkan M et al. Türkiye’de Covid-19 Pandemisinin Monitörizasyonu Için Interaktif ve Gerçek Zamanlı Bir Web Uygulaması: TURCOVID19. Anadolu Kliniği Tıp Bilimleri Dergisi.25(Special Issue on COVID 19):154-155. doi:10.21673/ anadoluklin.726347
8. Regmi K, Lwin CM. Factors Associated with the Implementation of Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions for Reducing Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): A Systematic Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021;18(8):4274. doi: 10.3390/ ijerph18084274
9. Spaccaferri G, Larrieu S, Pouey J, Calba C, Benet T et al. Early assessment of the impact of mitigation measures to control COVID-19 in 22 French metropolitan areas, October to November 2020. Eurosurveillance. 2020;25(50):2001974. doi: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2020.25.50.2001974
10. Meltem Ç. İtalya’da Sağlık Sistemi ve Covıd-19 Pandemisi Yanıtı. Toplum ve Hekim Dergisi. 2021;36(5):388-400.
11. Mut ANU. COVID-19 Pandemisinde İngiltere Sağlık Sistemi. Toplum ve Hekim Dergisi. 2021;36(5):350-365.
12. Gordon DV, Grafton RQ, Steinshamn SI. Cross-country effects and policy responses to COVID-19 in 2020: The Nordic countries. Economic Analysis and Policy. 2021;71:198-210. doi: 10.1016/j.eap.2021.04.015
13. Coşkun B. Rusya Federasyonu’nda Covıd-19 Pandemisi. Toplum ve Hekim Dergisi 2021;36(4):277-287.
14. Bashir S, Alabdulkarim N, Altwaijri N, Alhaidri N, Hashim R et al. The battle against the COVID-19 pandemic-a perspective from Saudi Arabia. One Health. 2021:100229. doi: 10.1016/j. onehlt.2021.100229
15. Lino DOdC, Barreto R, Souza FDd, Limaa CSM, Junior GBS et al. Impact of lockdown on bed occupancy rate in a referral hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic in northeast Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Infectious Diseases. 2020;24(5):466-469. doi: 10.1016/j.bjid.2020.08.002
16. Saul A, Scott N, Crabb BS, Majumdar SS, Coghlan B et al. Impact of Victoria’s Stage 3 lockdown on COVID-19 case numbers. The Medical Journal of Australia. 2020;213(11):494- 496. e1. doi: 10.5694/mja2.50872
17. Dechsupa S, Assawakosri S, Phakham S, Honsawek S Positive impact of lockdown on COVID-19 outbreak in Thailand. Travel Medicine and Infectious Disease. 2020;36:101802. doi: 10.1016/j.tmaid.2020.101802
18. Dighe A, Cattarino L, Cuomo-Dannenburg G, Skarp j, Imai N et al. Response to COVID-19 in South Korea and implications for lifting stringent interventions. BMC Med. 2020 Oct 9;18(1):321. doi:10.1186/s12916-020-01791-8
19. Jung F, Krieger V, Hufert FT, Küpper JH How we should respond to the Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 outbreak: A German perspective. Clinical Hemorheology and Microcirculation 2020;74(4):363-372. doi:10.3233/CH-209004
20. Koçak C. COVID-19 Isolation and Contact Tracing with Country Samples: A Systematic Review. Iranian Journal of Public Health. 2021;50(8):1547-1554. doi:10.18502/ijph. v50i8.6800
21. Meo SA, Abukhalaf AA, Alomar AA, AlMutairi FJ, Usmani AM, Klonoff DC Impact of lockdown on COVID-19 prevalence and mortality during 2020 pandemic: observational analysis of 27 countries. European Journal of Medical Research. 2020;25(1):1-7. doi:10.1186/s40001-020-00456-9