‘A tough winter’
State’s second COVID-19 surge may be nearly as bad as its first, experts warn
Connecticut’s growing surge of COVID-19 could be nearly as devastating as its initial wave last spring, experts warn, citing statistical models that forecast the likely spread of the disease.
These projections, along with Connecticut’s rapidly rising metrics, could soon force the state to restore restrictions to schools, restaurants and other businesses as the state approaches winter and a predicted coronavirus peak.
A model from UConn Health, for instance, predicts the hospital will see a continued increase and could reach its April numbers within the next month.
“As we move forward the uncertainty is larger, but it could be as high as the peak was in April toward the end of November or maybe into December,” said Pedro Mendes, a computational biologist who created the UConn Health model. “It could also not be as high.”
Though models vary widely and carry little certainty, most bring bad news about what Connecticut will experience next. An aggregation of COVID19 forecasts developed at UMass
Amherst projects Connecticut for 3,700 recorded cases a week by Dec. 1, as many as in mid-May, while an oft-cited forecast from the University of Washington predicts the state will need even more hospital beds in January than it did last April.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention earlier this week projected Connecticut will see about 40 COVID-19 deaths a week over the next month, far fewer than last spring but a devastating number nonetheless. The University of Washington model is more dire, forecasting about 400 deaths over the next month and more than 3,000 by Feb. 1.
While Gov. Ned Lamont has so far resisted the idea of rolling back Connecticut’s reopening — instead urging towns with high levels of infection to act on their own — these models suggest increased restrictions could soon become necessary. The governor said Friday that he is evaluating whether to order new statewide mandates to reduce the spread of the virus.
“I’m not a public health [expert], but where I’m sitting looking at [numbers] I think we should be prudent and we should take measures more seriously,” Mendes said. “It’s almost like you don’t see the exponential growth until you actually are on it.”
Lamont said Connecticut is “10 times more prepared” for this wave of COVID-19 than for the first and therefore better positioned to contain the outbreak. Still, he acknowledged Thursday that “if this infection rate continues on an upward trend, we’re going to have to make some changes to make sure you’re safe.”
Dr. Ajay Kumar, chief clinical officer at Hartford HealthCare, said last week he expected Connecticut’s numbers to rise for at least the next two-to-four weeks. He said he doesn’t anticipate a surge comparable to the one from last spring but acknowledged some models see that as possible.
“I would say we are on the pathway to being bad at the moment,” Kumar said. “We’re not quite there yet, but we’re on the pathway to being bad.”
Connecticut was hit harder last spring than nearly every other state, peaking at nearly 2,000 hospitalizations in late April and recording nearly 4,000 coronavirus-linked deaths by the end of May. Today, the numbers are considerably lower — 321 hospitalizations as of Thursday — but have increased sharply in recent weeks.
Dr. John Murphy, CEO of Nuvance Health, warned Monday that Connecticut is “at the beginning of [the current surge], not at the end of it.” Citing models he has reviewed, Murphy predicted a “tough winter ahead” with numbers increasing until an eventual peak in mid-January.
These warnings have often come with caveats. Increased understanding of COVID-19, as well as mask mandates that weren’t in place last spring, will likely mitigate spread. And improved treatment has meant fewer patients requiring intensive care and fewer deaths linked to the disease.
Still, experts can’t say with certainty that Connecticut will avoid the devastation of March and April, when thousands of residents died and hospitals neared their capacity.
“The worst-case scenario is always at play. It’s always a possibility,” said Dr. Tom Balcezak, chief medical officer at Yale New Haven Hospital. “With most flu pandemics, like the 1918 flu pandemic, the second wave can be worse than the first.”
Where I’m sitting looking at [numbers], I think we should be prudent and we should take measures more seriously. ... It’s almost like you don’t see the exponential growth until you actually are on it.”Pedro Mendes, computational biologist at UConn School of Medicine
Balcezak and Dr. Onyema Ogbuagu, an infectious disease specialist at Yale New Haven Health, both said they expect increased numbers in the coming weeks but that they couldn’t accurately predict beyond that timeframe.
Experts caution that models can never be exactly precise and that they’re likely to shift and change over time. Kumar noted that some models, such as the one from the University of Washington, had overshot on some of its estimates for Connecticut during the initial spring surge.
Mendes likened modeling COVID-19 to “predicting where hurricanes go.”
“You’re certain for the next one or two days, and then the cone starts opening up and uncertainties become large,” Mendes said. “Except here we have some control, and hurricanes we have no control.”
Mendes stressed that models predict spread based on current behavior, without regard for how that behavior might change. If individuals improve their rates of mask-wearing or if public officials close schools and businesses to limit spread, the viral outbreak might take a different course.
“Whatever the model predicts can be changed by the way our behavior changes,” he said. “If we change behavior, things can change drastically, for good or for worse.”