Mandatory Public Health Measures for Coronavirus-19 Are Associated With Improved Mortality, Equity and Economic Outcomes.

IF 3.4 4区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
International Journal of Health Services Pub Date : 2022-01-01 Epub Date: 2021-10-21 DOI:10.1177/00207314211049306
Brita Lundberg, Kathryn McDonald
{"title":"Mandatory Public Health Measures for Coronavirus-19 Are Associated With Improved Mortality, Equity and Economic Outcomes.","authors":"Brita Lundberg,&nbsp;Kathryn McDonald","doi":"10.1177/00207314211049306","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The impact of public health measures on the coronavirus-2019 pandemic was analyzed by comparing mandatory versus voluntary nonpharmaceutical interventions between 2 comparable European countries and among 3 U.S. states. Using an ecological retrospective cohort study design, we examine differences in mortality, economic impact, and equity. Compared to voluntary policies, mandatory shelter-in-place policies were associated with a 3- to 5-fold lower population-adjusted mortality in the U.S. model and between 11- to 12-fold lower in the European one. Voluntary shelter-in-place measures were associated with overall increased mortality cost, as measured by value of a statistical life; somewhat greater decreases in gross domestic product; and substantial negative impacts on minority communities, who experienced markedly increased mortality rates (the percentage of minority deaths was 2.3 and 4 times greater in the U.S. model and 14.5 times higher in the European one) and mortality cost (2.7- and 4.5-fold higher in the U.S. model and 11.1-fold higher in the European one). We conclude that voluntary policies are less effective than mandatory ones, based on historical precedent and the current analysis. Negative effects on health equity mirrored the increased mortality outcomes of voluntary policies, and there was no apparent economic benefit associated with voluntary measures.</p>","PeriodicalId":54959,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Health Services","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Health Services","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00207314211049306","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/10/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The impact of public health measures on the coronavirus-2019 pandemic was analyzed by comparing mandatory versus voluntary nonpharmaceutical interventions between 2 comparable European countries and among 3 U.S. states. Using an ecological retrospective cohort study design, we examine differences in mortality, economic impact, and equity. Compared to voluntary policies, mandatory shelter-in-place policies were associated with a 3- to 5-fold lower population-adjusted mortality in the U.S. model and between 11- to 12-fold lower in the European one. Voluntary shelter-in-place measures were associated with overall increased mortality cost, as measured by value of a statistical life; somewhat greater decreases in gross domestic product; and substantial negative impacts on minority communities, who experienced markedly increased mortality rates (the percentage of minority deaths was 2.3 and 4 times greater in the U.S. model and 14.5 times higher in the European one) and mortality cost (2.7- and 4.5-fold higher in the U.S. model and 11.1-fold higher in the European one). We conclude that voluntary policies are less effective than mandatory ones, based on historical precedent and the current analysis. Negative effects on health equity mirrored the increased mortality outcomes of voluntary policies, and there was no apparent economic benefit associated with voluntary measures.

针对冠状病毒19的强制性公共卫生措施与改善死亡率、公平和经济成果有关。
通过比较两个可比的欧洲国家和美国三个州的强制性和自愿非药物干预措施,分析了公共卫生措施对2019冠状病毒大流行的影响。采用生态回顾性队列研究设计,我们检验了死亡率、经济影响和公平性的差异。与自愿政策相比,在美国模型中,强制性安置政策与人口调整死亡率降低了3至5倍有关,在欧洲模型中,这一比例降低了11至12倍。按统计寿命值衡量,自愿安置措施与总体死亡成本增加有关;国内生产总值(gdp)降幅略大;以及对少数民族社区的重大负面影响,这些社区的死亡率(少数民族死亡率在美国模型中是2.3倍和4倍,在欧洲模型中是14.5倍)和死亡率成本(在美国模型中是2.7倍和4.5倍,在欧洲模型中是11.1倍)显著增加。根据历史先例和目前的分析,我们得出结论,自愿政策不如强制性政策有效。对卫生公平的负面影响反映了自愿政策导致死亡率增加的结果,而且与自愿措施没有明显的经济效益。
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
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
2.90%
发文量
41
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Health Services is a peer-reviewed journal that contains articles on health and social policy, political economy and sociology, history and philosophy, ethics and law in the areas of health and well-being. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
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