Many countries/regions implemented strict border measures (e.g., 14-day quarantines) as a blanket policy to prevent COVID-19 importations, while proposed “travel bubbles” as an alternative to reduce the impact of border controls. We aim to examine the differential importation risks with departure origins and post-arrival controls.
Methods
We developed a Bayesian framework to model disease progress of COVID-19 and the effectiveness of travel measures and inferred the origin-specific disease prevalence among inbound travellers, using data on passengers arriving in Hong Kong and laboratory-confirmed imported cases. We estimated the origin-specific risks of releasing infectious travellers under different control strategies and traveller volumes. We also estimated the risk of having released infectious travellers when a resurgence occurs in departure locations with no imported cases during a certain period.
Findings
Under the then strict controls of 14-day quarantine and testing on day 12, the Philippines imposed the greatest importation risk among the studied countries/regions (95.8% of releasing at least one infectious traveller, 95% credible interval (CrI), 94.8-96.6%). This was higher than that from low prevalence countries/regions (e.g., 23.4%, 95% CrI, 21.6-25.3% for Taiwan) if controls relaxed (i.e., 7-day quarantine and test on day 5). Increased traveller volumes and resurgence in departure locations with low prevalence under relaxed controls did not impose a greater importation risk than high prevalence locations under stricter controls.
Interpretation
Moderate relaxation of control measures for travellers arriving from low prevalence locations did not impose higher risks of community outbreaks than strict controls on travellers from high prevalence locations.
