The 40 health systems, COVID-19 (40HS, C-19) study

Author:

Braithwaite Jeffrey12ORCID,Tran Yvonne1ORCID,Ellis Louise A12ORCID,Westbrook Johanna3ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Centre for Healthcare Resilience and Implementation Science, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Level 6, 75 Talavera Road, NSW, Sydney, 2109, Australia

2. NHMRC Partnership Centre in Health System Sustainability, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Level 6, 75 Talavera Road, NSW, Sydney, 2109, Australia

3. Centre for Health Systems and Safety Research, Australian Institute of Health Innovation, Macquarie University, Level 6, 75 Talavera Road, NSW, Sydney, 2109, Australia

Abstract

Abstract Background The health, social and economic consequences of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2, henceforth COVID-19) pandemic have loomed large as every national government made decisions about how to respond. The 40 Health Systems, COVID-19 (40HS, C-19) study aimed to investigate relationships between governments’ capacity to respond (CTR), their response stringency, scope of COVID-19 testing and COVID-19 outcomes. Methods Data over March and April 2020 were extracted for 40 national health systems on prepandemic government CTR (Global Competitiveness Index), stringency measures (Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker Stringency Index), approach to COVID-19 testing and COVID-19 cases and deaths (Our-World-in-Data). Multidimensional scaling (MDS) and cluster analysis were applied to examine latent dimensions and visualize country similarities and dissimilarities. Outcomes were tested using multivariate and one-way analyses of variances and Kruskal–Wallis H tests. Results The MDS model found three dimensions explaining 91% of the variance and cluster analysis identified five national groupings. There was no association between national governments’ prepandemic CTR and the adoption of early stringent public health measures or approach to COVID-19 testing. Two national clusters applied early stringency measures and reported significantly lower cumulative deaths. The best performing national cluster (comprising Australia, South Korea, Iceland and Taiwan) adopted relatively early stringency measures but broader testing earlier than others, which was associated with a change in disease trajectory and the lowest COVID-19 death rates. Two clusters (one with high CTR and one low) both adopted late stringency measures and narrow testing and performed least well in COVID-19 outcomes. Conclusion Early stringency measures and intrinsic national capacities to deal with a pandemic are insufficient. Extended stringency measures, important in the short term, are not economically sustainable. Broad-based testing is key to managing COVID-19.

Funder

National Health and Medical Research Council

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy,General Medicine

Reference22 articles.

1. Responding to global systemic shocks: applying lessons from previous crises to COVID-19;Revenga;Global Agenda,2020

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3