Health policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2024
The association between SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence and cross-border mobility for visiting family or friends among Dutch residents of a Euregional province.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Pagen Demi Me, Hanssen Daniëlle At, van Loo Inge Hm, Brinkhues Stephanie, den Heijer Casper Dj, Dukers-Muijrers Nicole Htm, Hoebe Christian Jpa
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Border measures were implemented in many countries as infection prevention measures to interrupt between-country COVID-19 transmission. Border closings impact border region residents, as their professional and social lives are often intertwined across national borders. We studied whether crossing borders to visit family/friends in neighbouring countries (cross-border mobility) was associated with SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in Dutch Euregional residents.
METHODS: SARS-CoV-2 serostatus (negative/positive) was assessed (pre-vaccination) using laboratory testing to determine previous infection. Visiting Belgian or German family/friends in February-March 2020 was questioned. The association between cross-border mobility and seroprevalence was tested using logistic regression analysis, adjusted for previously identified exposure factors.
RESULTS: In 9,996 participants, 36.8 % (n = 3,677) reported cross-border family/friends. Of these, one-third (n = 1,306) visited their cross-border family/friends in February-March 2020. Multivariable analyses revealed no positive association between cross-border mobility and seropositivity, for both participants living in a border municipality (ORfamily/friends not visited=0.90 [95 % CI:0.78-1.04], ORfamily/friends visited=0.88 [95 % CI:0.73-1.05]), and for participants not living in a border municipality (ORfamily/friends not visited=0.91 [95 % CI:0.72-1.16], ORfamily/friends visited=0.62 [95 % CI:0.41-0.94]).
CONCLUSIONS: This study provided no evidence of cross-border mobility as an important exposure factor for SARS-CoV-2. The results of our unique real-world study suggest that cross-border mobility did not substantially contribute to cross-border SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the Netherlands.
METHODS: SARS-CoV-2 serostatus (negative/positive) was assessed (pre-vaccination) using laboratory testing to determine previous infection. Visiting Belgian or German family/friends in February-March 2020 was questioned. The association between cross-border mobility and seroprevalence was tested using logistic regression analysis, adjusted for previously identified exposure factors.
RESULTS: In 9,996 participants, 36.8 % (n = 3,677) reported cross-border family/friends. Of these, one-third (n = 1,306) visited their cross-border family/friends in February-March 2020. Multivariable analyses revealed no positive association between cross-border mobility and seropositivity, for both participants living in a border municipality (ORfamily/friends not visited=0.90 [95 % CI:0.78-1.04], ORfamily/friends visited=0.88 [95 % CI:0.73-1.05]), and for participants not living in a border municipality (ORfamily/friends not visited=0.91 [95 % CI:0.72-1.16], ORfamily/friends visited=0.62 [95 % CI:0.41-0.94]).
CONCLUSIONS: This study provided no evidence of cross-border mobility as an important exposure factor for SARS-CoV-2. The results of our unique real-world study suggest that cross-border mobility did not substantially contribute to cross-border SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the Netherlands.