Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Fifteen days in December: capture and analysis of Omicron-related travel restrictions
  1. Jordan Schermerhorn1,
  2. Alaina Case2,
  3. Ellie Graeden1,2,
  4. Justin Kerr3,
  5. Mackenzie Moore1,
  6. Siobhan Robinson-Marshall1,
  7. Trae Wallace2,
  8. Emily Woodrow1,
  9. Rebecca Katz1
  1. 1Center for Global Health Science and Security, Georgetown University, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
  2. 2Talus Analytics, Boulder, Colorado, USA
  3. 3Talus Analytics, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Rebecca Katz; Rebecca.Katz{at}georgetown.edu

Abstract

Following the identification of the Omicron variant of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in late November 2021, governments worldwide took actions intended to minimise the impact of the new variant within their borders. Despite guidance from the WHO advising a risk-based approach, many rapidly implemented stringent policies focused on travel restrictions. In this paper, we capture 221 national-level travel policies issued during the 3 weeks following publicisation of the Omicron variant. We characterise policies based on whether they target travellers from specific countries or focus more broadly on enhanced screening, and explore differences in approaches at the regional level. We find that initial reactions almost universally focused on entry bans and flight suspensions from Southern Africa, and that policies continued to target travel from these countries even after community transmission of the Omicron variant was detected elsewhere in the world. While layered testing and quarantine requirements were implemented by some countries later in this 3-week period, these enhanced screening policies were rarely the first response. The timing and conditionality of quarantine and testing requirements were not coordinated between countries or regions, creating logistical complications and burdening travellers with costs. Overall, response measures were rarely tied to specific criteria or adapted to match the unique epidemiology of the new variant.

  • COVID-19
  • control strategies
  • health policy
  • screening

Data availability statement

All data included in this manuscript are available at www.covidamp.org.

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Data availability statement

All data included in this manuscript are available at www.covidamp.org.

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Handling editor Seye Abimbola

  • Twitter @jordanschermer, @elliegraeden, @rebeccakatz5

  • Contributors RK and EG conceived the analysis and led the research team and effort. JS performed analysis, managed data collection and drafted manuscript. JS and TW generated figures. JS, MM, SR-M and EW performed data collection. AC, JK, and TW developed data ontology and architecture. All authors reviewed and approved the final draft of the manuscript.

  • Funding This study was funded by Nuclear Threat Initiative (AWD-774065; GR424051); Google Health (AWD-7774638; GR424622); Open Philanthropy (AWD-7774043; GR424026); Rockefeller Foundation (GR424623; AWD-7774639).

  • Map disclaimer The inclusion of any map (including the depiction of any boundaries therein), or of any geographic or locational reference, does not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of BMJ concerning the legal status of any country, territory, jurisdiction or area or of its authorities. Any such expression remains solely that of the relevant source and is not endorsed by BMJ. Maps are provided without any warranty of any kind, either express or implied.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.