Epidemiological outcomes and policy implementation in the Nordic countries during the COVID-19 pandemic.

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Adam Hallberg, Mia Aakjaer, Katri Aaltonen, Morten Andersen, Elisabeth Pedersen, Mohammadhossein Hajiebrahimi, Hedvig Nordeng, Fredrik Nyberg, Per-Jostein Samuelsen, Björn Wettermark
{"title":"Epidemiological outcomes and policy implementation in the Nordic countries during the COVID-19 pandemic.","authors":"Adam Hallberg, Mia Aakjaer, Katri Aaltonen, Morten Andersen, Elisabeth Pedersen, Mohammadhossein Hajiebrahimi, Hedvig Nordeng, Fredrik Nyberg, Per-Jostein Samuelsen, Björn Wettermark","doi":"10.1186/s13690-025-01531-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>During the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was an intensive debate on which strategies would be most effective to minimize the negative societal impact of the pandemic. This study aimed to provide an overview of key epidemiological outcome measures of the disease in the Nordic countries and the subsequent policy implementation that were undertaken to curb the outbreak.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Time trends in test-positive infections, hospitalizations, and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions due to COVID-19 as well as COVID-19 mortality and excess mortality were compared between Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden. The epidemiological patterns were presented in relation to 13 different policies implemented to a different degree in the countries, eight of which were related to containment and five to health systems policy. A stringency index summarized the intensity of the policies. Data were collected from Our World in Data, the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker and Eurostat. The investigated time period was 1 January 2020 to 30 April 2022.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, Sweden had more infections, deaths, hospitalizations, and ICU admissions than the other Nordic countries during the first three waves of the pandemic. However, in the fourth wave, Denmark exceeded Sweden in all outcomes. The overall stringency among the Nordic countries varied broadly. The lowest average stringency index was observed in Iceland and the highest in Sweden. Excess mortality over the whole study period was lowest in Iceland while Norway had very few ICU admissions.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The Nordic countries took vastly different approaches to contain the spread of the pandemic, but the long-term impact on excess mortality was similar. The variety in policy responses and epidemiological measures bring many opportunities for learning across the countries.</p>","PeriodicalId":48578,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Public Health","volume":"83 1","pages":"46"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13690-025-01531-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: During the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was an intensive debate on which strategies would be most effective to minimize the negative societal impact of the pandemic. This study aimed to provide an overview of key epidemiological outcome measures of the disease in the Nordic countries and the subsequent policy implementation that were undertaken to curb the outbreak.

Methods: Time trends in test-positive infections, hospitalizations, and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions due to COVID-19 as well as COVID-19 mortality and excess mortality were compared between Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden. The epidemiological patterns were presented in relation to 13 different policies implemented to a different degree in the countries, eight of which were related to containment and five to health systems policy. A stringency index summarized the intensity of the policies. Data were collected from Our World in Data, the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker and Eurostat. The investigated time period was 1 January 2020 to 30 April 2022.

Results: Overall, Sweden had more infections, deaths, hospitalizations, and ICU admissions than the other Nordic countries during the first three waves of the pandemic. However, in the fourth wave, Denmark exceeded Sweden in all outcomes. The overall stringency among the Nordic countries varied broadly. The lowest average stringency index was observed in Iceland and the highest in Sweden. Excess mortality over the whole study period was lowest in Iceland while Norway had very few ICU admissions.

Conclusions: The Nordic countries took vastly different approaches to contain the spread of the pandemic, but the long-term impact on excess mortality was similar. The variety in policy responses and epidemiological measures bring many opportunities for learning across the countries.

背景:在 COVID-19 大流行的最初阶段,人们就哪些策略能最有效地减少大流行对社会的负面影响展开了激烈的讨论。本研究旨在概述该疾病在北欧国家的主要流行病学结果以及随后为遏制疫情而采取的政策实施情况:方法:比较了丹麦、芬兰、冰岛、挪威和瑞典因 COVID-19 导致的检测阳性感染、住院和重症监护室 (ICU) 入院人数以及 COVID-19 死亡率和超额死亡率的时间趋势。流行病学模式与各国在不同程度上实施的 13 种不同政策有关,其中 8 种与遏制有关,5 种与卫生系统政策有关。一项严格指数概括了这些政策的强度。数据收集自 "我们的数据世界"、牛津 COVID-19 政府响应跟踪系统和欧盟统计局。调查时间段为 2020 年 1 月 1 日至 2022 年 4 月 30 日:总体而言,在大流行的前三波中,瑞典的感染人数、死亡人数、住院人数和重症监护室入院人数均高于其他北欧国家。然而,在第四波大流行中,丹麦在所有结果上都超过了瑞典。北欧国家的总体严格程度差别很大。冰岛的平均严格指数最低,瑞典最高。在整个研究期间,冰岛的超额死亡率最低,而挪威入住重症监护室的人数很少:结论:北欧国家在遏制大流行病蔓延方面采取的方法大相径庭,但对超额死亡率的长期影响却相似。政策应对和流行病学措施的多样性为各国提供了许多学习的机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Archives of Public Health
Archives of Public Health Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
3.00%
发文量
244
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: rchives of Public Health is a broad scope public health journal, dedicated to publishing all sound science in the field of public health. The journal aims to better the understanding of the health of populations. The journal contributes to public health knowledge, enhances the interaction between research, policy and practice and stimulates public health monitoring and indicator development. The journal considers submissions on health outcomes and their determinants, with clear statements about the public health and policy implications. Archives of Public Health welcomes methodological papers (e.g., on study design and bias), papers on health services research, health economics, community interventions, and epidemiological studies dealing with international comparisons, the determinants of inequality in health, and the environmental, behavioural, social, demographic and occupational correlates of health and diseases.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信