| Literature DB >> 35432621 |
Abstract
Chikungunya is one of the Aedes aegypti diseases that mosquito transmits to humans and that are common in tropical countries like Yemen. In this work, we formulated a novel dynamic mathematical model framework, which integrates COVID-19 and Chikungunya outbreaks. The proposed model is governed by a system of dynamic ordinary differential equations (ODEs). Particle swarm optimization was employed to solve the parameters estimation problem of the outbreaks of COVID-19 and Chikungunya in Yemen (March 1, 2020, to May 30, 2020). Besides, a bi-objective optimal control model was formulated, which minimizes the number of affected individuals and minimizes the total cost associated with the intervention strategies. The bi-objective optimal control was also solved using PSO. Five preventive measures were considered to curb the environmental and social factors that trigger the emergence of these viruses. Several strategies were simulated to evaluate the best possible strategy under the conditions and available resources in Yemen. The results obtained confirm that the strategy, which provides resources to prevent the transmission of Chikungunya and provides sufficient resources for testing, applying average social distancing, and quarrying the affected individuals, has a significant effect on flattening the epidemic curves and is the most suitable strategy in Yemen.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; Chikungunya; Optimal control; Particle swarm optimization; Prediction
Year: 2022 PMID: 35432621 PMCID: PMC8994927 DOI: 10.1007/s12652-022-03796-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput
Description and initial values of model variables
| Variables | Description | Initial conditions | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total population size of humans | 29, 825, 964 | (Worldometers | |
| Number of susceptible humans to both COVID-19 and CHIKV | Assumed | ||
| Number of humans exposed to COVID-19 | (Tsay et al. | ||
| Number of asymptomatic COVID-19 individuals | 0 | Assumed | |
| Number of COVID-19- infected individuals | 0 | Assumed | |
| Number of recovered from COVID-19 individuals | 0 | Assumed | |
| Number of perished with COVID-19 individuals | 0 | Assumed | |
| Number of infected to CHIKV after recovery from COVID-19 | 0 | Assumed | |
| Number of humans exposed to CHIKV | 0 | Assumed | |
| Number of asymptomatic CHIKV individuals | 0 | Assumed | |
| Number of CHIKV infected individuals | 0 | Assumed | |
| Number of recovered from CHIKV individuals | 0 | Assumed | |
| Number of perished with CHIKV individuals | 0 | Assumed | |
| Number of infected to COVID-19 after recovery from CHIKV | 0 | Assumed | |
| Number of dually infected with both COVID-19 and CHIKV | 0 | Assumed | |
| Number of recovered from both COVID-19 and CHIKV | 0 | Assumed | |
| Number of perished by both COVID-19 and CHIKV | 0 | Assumed | |
| The total population of mosquitoes | (Sanchez et al. | ||
| Number of susceptible mosquitoes to CHIKV | (Sanchez et al. | ||
| Number of mosquitoes exposed to CHIKV | 0 | (Sanchez et al. | |
| Number of CHIKV-infected mosquitoes | 1 | (Sanchez et al. |
Parameters description and their values
| Parameters | Description | Value (range) | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| The peak limit of the infected individuals with COVID-19 | Assumed | ||
| The peak limit of the infected individuals with CHIKV | Assumed | ||
| The peak limit of the infected mosquitoes | Assumed | ||
| Time-dynamic function to measure the social distancing rate | (Tsay et al. | ||
| Time-dynamic function to measure the quarantining rate | (Tsay et al. | ||
| Time-dynamic function to measure the testing rate | (Tsay et al. | ||
| Time-dynamic function to measure the personal protection rate | Assumed | ||
| Time-dynamic function to measure the ratio of used the insecticides and larvicides for reducing the mosquitoes population | Assumed | ||
| Rate of exposed to CHIKV | 0.0209 | Estimated | |
| Transmission rate of COVID-19 | 0.09 | Estimated | |
| Transmission rate of CHIKV | 0.0780 | Estimated | |
| Rate of dually infected with both COVID-19 and CHIKV | 0 | Assumed | |
| Rate of mosquitoes exposed to CHIKV | 0.3574 | Estimated | |
| Rate of infected to COVID-19 Asymptomatically-Symptomatically | 0.55 | Estimated | |
| Rate of infected to CHIKV Asymptomatically-Symptomatically | 0.5 | Estimated | |
| Rate of infected to CHIKV of COVID-19 patient | 0 | Assumed | |
| Rate of infected to COVID-19 of CHIKV patient | 0 | Assumed | |
| Recovery rate from COVID-19 and CHIKV respectively | 0.0964, 0.98 | Estimated | |
| Death rate from COVID-19, CHIKV and both respectively | 0.0974, 0.0127, 0.0889 | Estimated | |
| Susceptible for COVID-19, CHIKV and both again | 0.0889,0.09,0.07 | Estimated | |
| Infected rate by CHIKV after recovered from COVID-19 | 0 | Assumed | |
| Infected rate by COVID-19 after recovered from CHIKV | 0 | Assumed | |
| Rate of mosquitoes infected to CHIKV | 0.5 | Estimated | |
| Recovery rate of COVID-19 and CHIKV sequentially | 0 | Assumed | |
| Recovery rate of CHIKV and COVID-19 sequentially | Assumed | ||
| Recovery rate of both COVID-19 and CHIKV simultaneously | 0 | Assumed |
Fig. 1Schematic diagram of the compartmental Chikungunya and COVID-19 co-infection model
PSO configuration parameters
| Parameter | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Value | 1000 | 200 | 0.75 | 1.5 | 2 |
Fig. 2The result of simulation for all human classes, the estimated trajectories of the time-dynamic functions, and analysis and week-wise prediction using the proposed system. The real data represented by the black dotted, the red dotted lines represent the fitting line from the proposed system, the predicted data using PSO represented by the red solid lines, and the predicted data using Pyomo optimization modelling represented by the blue solid lines (color figure online)
The estimated parameter values using PSO
| Parameters | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | 0.0209 | 0.0900 | 0.0780 | 0.3574 | 0.55 | 0.5000 | 0.5000 |
| Std | 0.0630 | 0.1449 | 0.1839 | 0.0701 | 0.2415 | 0.0000 | 0.0000 |
Fig. 3Comparison of the simulation results of the control levels of strategy 1
Fig. 4Comparison of the simulation results of two cases of strategy 2
Fig. 5Comparison of the simulation results of two cases of strategy 3
Fig. 6Trade-off curve of both functions for all cases