Correlation of Society Stringency/Openness Measures with Timely Trend of COVID-19 Cases - Case Study – Albania Versus Italy

G. Koduzi, F. Cenko
{"title":"Correlation of Society Stringency/Openness Measures with Timely Trend of COVID-19 Cases - Case Study – Albania Versus Italy","authors":"G. Koduzi, F. Cenko","doi":"10.26417/164rms38v","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Following the WHO declaration for COVID-19 as a pandemic, this disease has caused an international crisis with a severe impact on economic and health care systems. After the first cases reported in China, the disease has progressively widespread worldwide where all affected countries has adapted specific safety protocols and tried to find new therapies in order to face this new disease. The final objective is to evaluate the overall impact of stringency measures taken from Albanian and Italian governmental authorities in relation to daily cases of COVID-19 in each country. This is a descriptive paper where the data collected in Albania and Italy according to authority-based stringency measures were compared with their output; temporary trend of daily cases. Officially Albania reported the first COVID-19 case in 8th of March in an Albanian citizen just arrived from Italy, meanwhile in Italy the first cases dated January 31st were a Chinese couple in Rome who had travel from Wuhan City. Both governments took action by applying different closer measures; thereby Blavatnik School of Government has introduced the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker (OxCGRT) in order to quantifying numerically these actions. According to OxCGRT, Albania and Italy present similar level of stringency indicator, but epidemiological curve of daily cases is totally different in shape. Italian curve corresponds to a typical outbreak, while Albania curve seem like any endemic disease in the population. In front of this pandemic, the Albanian curve might be cut off as a result a small number of tests carried out by Albania authorities, 6906 tests/million population, which is far lower than tests performed by Italian authorities, which is 11 times fold (79908 test/million population). Toward end of May the number of COVID-19 were dropped so both governments planned to relief closure measures by opening most of public and economic activities. In front of the fear that COVID-19 could rise up again, as a result of virus transmission amongst people that was observed in Albania, while in Italy continued with the low and decreasing trend of disease cases. Data and their comparison though different indicators or index, shows that stringency measures could contribute on a temporary diminution of new cases of COVD-19, but if not are accompanied with individual protection measures, and/or special vulnerable groups it might be a missing opportunity because the general population might lose what was achieved during national quarantine. On the other hand, taking in consideration low public spending per capita in Albania (307 USD, 2014), moving from “hummer” toward “dance” phase, managing and supporting health system is critical. Public health services should be mainly the entitled authorities to monitor data and come up with specific and efficient measures in order to prevent an increase of cases on the overall population.Keywords: Albania, Italy, stringency index, epidemic, COVID-19; Pandemic;","PeriodicalId":11935,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Medicine and Natural Sciences","volume":"34 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Medicine and Natural Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26417/164rms38v","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Following the WHO declaration for COVID-19 as a pandemic, this disease has caused an international crisis with a severe impact on economic and health care systems. After the first cases reported in China, the disease has progressively widespread worldwide where all affected countries has adapted specific safety protocols and tried to find new therapies in order to face this new disease. The final objective is to evaluate the overall impact of stringency measures taken from Albanian and Italian governmental authorities in relation to daily cases of COVID-19 in each country. This is a descriptive paper where the data collected in Albania and Italy according to authority-based stringency measures were compared with their output; temporary trend of daily cases. Officially Albania reported the first COVID-19 case in 8th of March in an Albanian citizen just arrived from Italy, meanwhile in Italy the first cases dated January 31st were a Chinese couple in Rome who had travel from Wuhan City. Both governments took action by applying different closer measures; thereby Blavatnik School of Government has introduced the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker (OxCGRT) in order to quantifying numerically these actions. According to OxCGRT, Albania and Italy present similar level of stringency indicator, but epidemiological curve of daily cases is totally different in shape. Italian curve corresponds to a typical outbreak, while Albania curve seem like any endemic disease in the population. In front of this pandemic, the Albanian curve might be cut off as a result a small number of tests carried out by Albania authorities, 6906 tests/million population, which is far lower than tests performed by Italian authorities, which is 11 times fold (79908 test/million population). Toward end of May the number of COVID-19 were dropped so both governments planned to relief closure measures by opening most of public and economic activities. In front of the fear that COVID-19 could rise up again, as a result of virus transmission amongst people that was observed in Albania, while in Italy continued with the low and decreasing trend of disease cases. Data and their comparison though different indicators or index, shows that stringency measures could contribute on a temporary diminution of new cases of COVD-19, but if not are accompanied with individual protection measures, and/or special vulnerable groups it might be a missing opportunity because the general population might lose what was achieved during national quarantine. On the other hand, taking in consideration low public spending per capita in Albania (307 USD, 2014), moving from “hummer” toward “dance” phase, managing and supporting health system is critical. Public health services should be mainly the entitled authorities to monitor data and come up with specific and efficient measures in order to prevent an increase of cases on the overall population.Keywords: Albania, Italy, stringency index, epidemic, COVID-19; Pandemic;
社会严格/开放措施与COVID-19病例及时趋势的相关性研究——以阿尔巴尼亚与意大利为例
在世卫组织宣布COVID-19为大流行之后,这种疾病引发了一场国际危机,对经济和卫生保健系统产生了严重影响。在中国报告了第一例病例之后,该病已逐渐在世界范围内广泛传播,所有受影响的国家都已调整了具体的安全规程,并试图找到新的治疗方法,以应对这种新疾病。最后的目标是评估阿尔巴尼亚和意大利政府当局就各自国家的每日COVID-19病例采取的严格措施的总体影响。这是一篇描述性论文,其中根据基于当局的严格措施在阿尔巴尼亚和意大利收集的数据与其产出进行了比较;每日病例的临时趋势。阿尔巴尼亚官方于3月8日报告了第一例COVID-19病例,患者是一名刚从意大利抵达的阿尔巴尼亚公民,同时在意大利,1月31日的第一例病例是一对从武汉市前往罗马的中国夫妇。两国政府采取了不同的措施;因此,布拉瓦尼克政府学院推出了牛津COVID-19政府响应跟踪器(OxCGRT),以便对这些行动进行数字量化。根据OxCGRT,阿尔巴尼亚和意大利的严格指标水平相似,但每日病例的流行病学曲线形状完全不同。意大利曲线对应于典型的爆发,而阿尔巴尼亚曲线似乎是人口中的任何地方病。在这次大流行之前,阿尔巴尼亚的曲线可能会被切断,因为阿尔巴尼亚当局进行了少量测试,6906次/百万人口,远低于意大利当局进行的测试,后者是前者的11倍(79908次/百万人口)。随着5月末新冠肺炎确诊病例的减少,两国政府计划通过开放大部分公共和经济活动来缓解封锁措施。由于阿尔巴尼亚观察到病毒在人群中传播,人们担心COVID-19可能再次抬头,而在意大利,疾病病例继续保持低水平和下降趋势。数据及其通过不同指标或指数的比较表明,严格措施可能有助于暂时减少新发病例,但如果不同时采取个人保护措施和/或特殊弱势群体,可能会失去机会,因为一般人群可能会失去在国家隔离期间取得的成就。另一方面,考虑到阿尔巴尼亚人均公共支出较低(2014年为307美元),从“悍马”阶段转向“舞蹈”阶段,管理和支持卫生系统至关重要。公共卫生服务部门应主要是有权监测数据并提出具体和有效措施的当局,以防止总体人口中病例的增加。关键词:阿尔巴尼亚、意大利;严格指数;疫情;大流行;
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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