Flattening the curve is not enough, we need to squash it. An explainer using a simple model

BackgroundAround the world there are examples of both effective control (e.g., South Korea, Japan) and less successful control (e.g., Italy, Spain, United States) of COVID-19 with dramatic differences in the consequent epidemic curves. Models agree that flattening the curve without controlling the epidemic completely is insufficient and will lead to an overwhelmed health service. A recent model, calibrated for the UK and US, demonstrated this starkly. MethodsWe used a simple compartmental deterministic model of COVID-19 transmission in Australia, to illustrate the dynamics resulting from shifting or flattening the curve versus completely squashing it. ResultsWe find that when the reproduction number is close to one, a small decrease in transmission leads to a large reduction in burden (i.e., cases, deaths and hospitalisations), but achieving this early in the epidemic through social distancing interventions also implies that the community will not reach herd immunity. ConclusionsAustralia needs not just to shift and flatten the curve, but to squash it by getting the reproduction number below one. This will require Australia to achieve transmission rates at least two thirds lower than those seen in the most severely affected countries. The knownCOVID-19 has been diagnosed in over 4,000 Australians. Up until mid-March, most were from international travel, but now we are seeing a rise in locally acquired cases. The newThis study uses a simple transmission dynamic model to demonstrate the difference between moderate changes to the reproduction number and forcing the reproduction number below one. The implicationsLowering local transmission is becoming important in reducing the transmission of COVID-19. To maintain control of the epidemic, the focus should be on those in the community who do not regard themselves as at risk.