Achieving global mortality reduction targets and universal health coverage: The impact of COVID-19

Wenhui Mao and coauthors discuss possible implications of the COVID-19 pandemic for health aspirations in low- and middle-income countries.

Summary points

• The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic threatens progress toward a “grand convergence” in global health—universal reduction in deaths from infections and maternal and child health conditions to low levels—and toward achieving universal health coverage (UHC).
• Our analysis suggests that COVID-19 will exacerbate the difficulty of achieving grand convergence targets for tuberculosis (TB), maternal mortality, and, probably, for under-5 mortality. HIV targets are likely to be met.
• By 2035, our analysis suggests that the public sectors of low-income countries (LICs) would only be able to finance about a third of the costs of a package of 120 essential non-COVID-19 health interventions through domestic sources, unless the country increases significantly the priority assigned to the health sector; lower middle-income countries (LMICs) would likewise only be able to finance a little less than half.
• The likelihood of getting back on track for reaching grand convergence and UHC will depend on (i) how quickly COVID-19 vaccines can be deployed in LICs and LMICs; (ii) how much additional public sector health financing can be mobilized from external and domestic sources; and (iii) whether countries can rapidly strengthen and focus their health delivery systems.

     

COVID-19 and indirect health implications in Africa: Impact,mitigation measures,and lessons learned for improved disease control

Seth Inzaule and co-authors discuss implications of the COVID-19 pandemic for health in African countries.

Summary points

• Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and the mitigation measures taken to limit its spread have significantly disrupted other essential health services in Africa. This disruption has threatened the control of major high-burden diseases such as HIV, tuberculosis (TB), and malaria as well as the prevention of maternal and child mortality.
• While the 2020 WHO global reports for HIV, TB, and malaria show progress in control of these diseases in African countries, there are still significant gaps in meeting the global targets. Similarly, modeling studies predict that most African countries are unlikely to meet the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 2030 targets for reductions in maternal and child mortality under the current rate of progress.
• Prediction models and emerging empirical data indicate that the implemented mitigation measures against COVID-19 such as travel restrictions and lockdowns as well as the repurposing of health resources and suspension of prevention programs such as immunizations will lead to an increase in new infections and deaths, significantly reversing the gains achieved in the control of these health challenges.
• A more comprehensive COVID-19 response that minimizes indirect deaths is therefore warranted in Africa. These include implementing WHO recommendations that limit contact with the clinic where possible, such as multimonths drug dispensing, self-testing, virtual platforms for case management, community- and home-based prevention, and care services such as home distribution of test kits, vaccines, treatment, and mosquito nets.
• This is in addition to ensuring effective implementation of COVID-19 infection prevention and control measures in healthcare facilities including providing healthcare workers with personal protective equipment and prioritizing them for COVID-19 immunization.
• There is also a need to incorporate aggressive recovery plans to reverse the lost gains in disease control efforts and put African countries back on course toward achieving the global targets. This includes leveraging on the wider COVID-19 response enablements such as the increased political will and global solidarity funding efforts to support a more comprehensive response that accounts for the indirect public health effects of the pandemic.

     

COVID-19 and excess mortality in the United States: A county-level analysis

BackgroundCoronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) excess deaths refer to increases in mortality over what would normally have been expected in the absence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Several prior studies have calculated excess deaths in the United States but were limited to the national or state level, precluding an examination of area-level variation in excess mortality and excess deaths not assigned to COVID-19. In this study, we take advantage of county-level variation in COVID-19 mortality to estimate excess deaths associated with the pandemic and examine how the extent of excess mortality not assigned to COVID-19 varies across subsets of counties defined by sociodemographic and health characteristics.Methods and findingsIn this ecological, cross-sectional study, we made use of provisional National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) data on direct COVID-19 and all-cause mortality occurring in US counties from January 1 to December 31, 2020 and reported before March 12, 2021. We used data with a 10-week time lag between the final day that deaths occurred and the last day that deaths could be reported to improve the completeness of data. Our sample included 2,096 counties with 20 or more COVID-19 deaths. The total number of residents living in these counties was 319.1 million. On average, the counties were 18.7% Hispanic, 12.7% non-Hispanic Black, and 59.6% non-Hispanic White. A total of 15.9% of the population was older than 65 years. We first modeled the relationship between 2020 all-cause mortality and COVID-19 mortality across all counties and then produced fully stratified models to explore differences in this relationship among strata of sociodemographic and health factors. Overall, we found that for every 100 deaths assigned to COVID-19, 120 all-cause deaths occurred (95% CI, 116 to 124), implying that 17% (95% CI, 14% to 19%) of excess deaths were ascribed to causes of death other than COVID-19 itself. Our stratified models revealed that the percentage of excess deaths not assigned to COVID-19 was substantially higher among counties with lower median household incomes and less formal education, counties with poorer health and more diabetes, and counties in the South and West. Counties with more non-Hispanic Black residents, who were already at high risk of COVID-19 death based on direct counts, also reported higher percentages of excess deaths not assigned to COVID-19. Study limitations include the use of provisional data that may be incomplete and the lack of disaggregated data on county-level mortality by age, sex, race/ethnicity, and sociodemographic and health characteristics.ConclusionsIn this study, we found that direct COVID-19 death counts in the US in 2020 substantially underestimated total excess mortality attributable to COVID-19. Racial and socioeconomic inequities in COVID-19 mortality also increased when excess deaths not assigned to COVID-19 were considered. Our results highlight the importance of considering health equity in the policy response to the pandemic.

Andrew Stokes and co-workers report a county-level analysis of excess deaths owing to COVID-19 in the United States.     

Universal healthcare coverage and health service delivery before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: A difference-in-difference study of childhood immunization coverage from 195 countries

BackgroundSeveral studies have indicated that universal health coverage (UHC) improves health service utilization and outcomes in countries. These studies, however, have primarily assessed UHC’s peacetime impact, limiting our understanding of UHC’s potential protective effects during public health crises such as the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We empirically explored whether countries’ progress toward UHC is associated with differential COVID-19 impacts on childhood immunization coverage.Methods and findingsUsing a quasi-experimental difference-in-difference (DiD) methodology, we quantified the relationship between UHC and childhood immunization coverage before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The analysis considered 195 World Health Organization (WHO) member states and their ability to provision 12 out of 14 childhood vaccines between 2010 and 2020 as an outcome. We used the 2019 UHC Service Coverage Index (UHC SCI) to divide countries into a “high UHC index” group (UHC SCI ≥80) and the rest. All analyses included potential confounders including the calendar year, countries’ income group per the World Bank classification, countries’ geographical region as defined by WHO, and countries’ preparedness for an epidemic/pandemic as represented by the Global Health Security Index 2019. For robustness, we replicated the analysis using a lower cutoff value of 50 for the UHC index. A total of 20,230 country-year observations were included in the study. The DiD estimators indicated that countries with a high UHC index (UHC SCI ≥80, n = 35) had a 2.70% smaller reduction in childhood immunization coverage during the pandemic year of 2020 as compared to the countries with UHC index less than 80 (DiD coefficient 2.70; 95% CI: 0.75, 4.65; p-value = 0.007). This relationship, however, became statistically nonsignificant at the lower cutoff value of UHC SCI <50 (n = 60). The study’s primary limitation was scarce data availability, which restricted our ability to account for confounders and to test our hypothesis for other relevant outcomes.ConclusionsWe observed that countries with greater progress toward UHC were associated with significantly smaller declines in childhood immunization coverage during the pandemic. This identified association may potentially provide support for the importance of UHC in building health system resilience. Our findings strongly suggest that policymakers should continue to advocate for achieving UHC in coming years.

In a difference-in-difference study, Sooyoung Kim and colleagues study associations between progress toward universal healthcare coverage and childhood immunizations before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.     

Excess years of life lost to COVID-19 and other causes of death by sex,neighbourhood deprivation,and region in England and Wales during 2020: A registry-based study

BackgroundDeaths in the first year of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in England and Wales were unevenly distributed socioeconomically and geographically. However, the full scale of inequalities may have been underestimated to date, as most measures of excess mortality do not adequately account for varying age profiles of deaths between social groups. We measured years of life lost (YLL) attributable to the pandemic, directly or indirectly, comparing mortality across geographic and socioeconomic groups.Methods and findingsWe used national mortality registers in England and Wales, from 27 December 2014 until 25 December 2020, covering 3,265,937 deaths. YLLs (main outcome) were calculated using 2019 single year sex-specific life tables for England and Wales. Interrupted time-series analyses, with panel time-series models, were used to estimate expected YLL by sex, geographical region, and deprivation quintile between 7 March 2020 and 25 December 2020 by cause: direct deaths (COVID-19 and other respiratory diseases), cardiovascular disease and diabetes, cancer, and other indirect deaths (all other causes). Excess YLL during the pandemic period were calculated by subtracting observed from expected values. Additional analyses focused on excess deaths for region and deprivation strata, by age-group. Between 7 March 2020 and 25 December 2020, there were an estimated 763,550 (95% CI: 696,826 to 830,273) excess YLL in England and Wales, equivalent to a 15% (95% CI: 14 to 16) increase in YLL compared to the equivalent time period in 2019. There was a strong deprivation gradient in all-cause excess YLL, with rates per 100,000 population ranging from 916 (95% CI: 820 to 1,012) for the least deprived quintile to 1,645 (95% CI: 1,472 to 1,819) for the most deprived. The differences in excess YLL between deprivation quintiles were greatest in younger age groups; for all-cause deaths, a mean of 9.1 years per death (95% CI: 8.2 to 10.0) were lost in the least deprived quintile, compared to 10.8 (95% CI: 10.0 to 11.6) in the most deprived; for COVID-19 and other respiratory deaths, a mean of 8.9 years per death (95% CI: 8.7 to 9.1) were lost in the least deprived quintile, compared to 11.2 (95% CI: 11.0 to 11.5) in the most deprived. For all-cause mortality, estimated deaths in the most deprived compared to the most affluent areas were much higher in younger age groups, but similar for those aged 85 or over. There was marked variability in both all-cause and direct excess YLL by region, with the highest rates in the North West. Limitations include the quasi-experimental nature of the research design and the requirement for accurate and timely recording.ConclusionsIn this study, we observed strong socioeconomic and geographical health inequalities in YLL, during the first calendar year of the COVID-19 pandemic. These were in line with long-standing existing inequalities in England and Wales, with the most deprived areas reporting the largest numbers in potential YLL.

In a registry-based study, Evangelos Kontopantelis and colleagues examine the excess years of life lost to COVID-19 and other causes of death by sex, neighbourhood deprivation and region in England & Wales during 2020.     

Factors associated with excess all-cause mortality in the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: A time series analysis using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink

BackgroundExcess mortality captures the total effect of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on mortality and is not affected by misspecification of cause of death. We aimed to describe how health and demographic factors were associated with excess mortality during, compared to before, the pandemic.Methods and findingsWe analysed a time series dataset including 9,635,613 adults (≥40 years old) registered at United Kingdom general practices contributing to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. We extracted weekly numbers of deaths and numbers at risk between March 2015 and July 2020, stratified by individual-level factors. Excess mortality during Wave 1 of the UK pandemic (5 March to 27 May 2020) compared to the prepandemic period was estimated using seasonally adjusted negative binomial regression models. Relative rates (RRs) of death for a range of factors were estimated before and during Wave 1 by including interaction terms. We found that all-cause mortality increased by 43% (95% CI 40% to 47%) during Wave 1 compared with prepandemic. Changes to the RR of death associated with most sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were small during Wave 1 compared with prepandemic. However, the mortality RR associated with dementia markedly increased (RR for dementia versus no dementia prepandemic: 3.5, 95% CI 3.4 to 3.5; RR during Wave 1: 5.1, 4.9 to 5.3); a similar pattern was seen for learning disabilities (RR prepandemic: 3.6, 3.4 to 3.5; during Wave 1: 4.8, 4.4 to 5.3), for black or South Asian ethnicity compared to white, and for London compared to other regions. Relative risks for morbidities were stable in multiple sensitivity analyses. However, a limitation of the study is that we cannot assume that the risks observed during Wave 1 would apply to other waves due to changes in population behaviour, virus transmission, and risk perception.ConclusionsThe first wave of the UK COVID-19 pandemic appeared to amplify baseline mortality risk to approximately the same relative degree for most population subgroups. However, disproportionate increases in mortality were seen for those with dementia, learning disabilities, non-white ethnicity, or living in London.

Helen Strongman and colleagues investigate the health and demographic factors associated with excess mortality during, as compared to before, the COVID-19 pandemic.     

The impact of COVID-19 on clinical research for Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs): A case study of bubonic plague

BackgroundAmong the many collaterals of the COVID-19 pandemic is the disruption of health services and vital clinical research. COVID-19 has magnified the challenges faced in research and threatens to slow research for urgently needed therapeutics for Neglected Tropical Diseases (NTDs) and diseases affecting the most vulnerable populations. Here we explore the impact of the pandemic on a clinical trial for plague therapeutics and strategies that have been considered to ensure research efforts continue.MethodsTo understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the trial accrual rate, we documented changes in patterns of all-cause consultations that took place before and during the pandemic at health centres in two districts of the Amoron’I Mania region of Madagascar where the trial is underway. We also considered trends in plague reporting and other external factors that may have contributed to slow recruitment.ResultsDuring the pandemic, we found a 27% decrease in consultations at the referral hospital, compared to an 11% increase at peripheral health centres, as well as an overall drop during the months of lockdown. We also found a nation-wide trend towards reduced number of reported plague cases.DiscussionCOVID-19 outbreaks are unlikely to dissipate in the near future. Declining NTD case numbers recorded during the pandemic period should not be viewed in isolation or taken as a marker of things to come. It is vitally important that researchers are prepared for a rebound in cases and, most importantly, that research continues to avoid NTDs becoming even more neglected.     

Implications of armed conflict for maternal and child health: A regression analysis of data from 181 countries for 2000–2019

BackgroundArmed conflicts have major indirect health impacts in addition to the direct harms from violence. They create enduring political instability, destabilise health systems, and foster negative socioeconomic and environmental conditions—all of which constrain efforts to reduce maternal and child mortality. The detrimental impacts of conflict on global maternal and child health are not robustly quantified. This study assesses the association between conflict and maternal and child health globally.Methods and findingsData for 181 countries (2000–2019) from the Uppsala Conflict Data Program and World Bank were analysed using panel regression models. Primary outcomes were maternal, under-5, infant, and neonatal mortality rates. Secondary outcomes were delivery by a skilled birth attendant and diphtheria, pertussis, and tetanus (DPT) and measles vaccination coverage. Models were adjusted for 10 confounders, country and year fixed effects, and conflict lagged by 1 year. Further lagged associations up to 10 years post-conflict were tested. The number of excess deaths due to conflict was estimated. Out of 3,718 country–year observations, 522 (14.0%) had minor conflicts and 148 (4.0%) had wars. In adjusted models, conflicts classified as wars were associated with an increase in maternal mortality of 36.9 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births (95% CI 1.9–72.0; 0.3 million excess deaths [95% CI 0.2 million–0.4 million] over the study period), an increase in infant mortality of 2.8 per 1,000 live births (95% CI 0.1–5.5; 2.0 million excess deaths [95% CI 1.6 million–2.5 million]), a decrease in DPT vaccination coverage of 4.9% (95% CI 1.5%–8.3%), and a decrease in measles vaccination coverage of 7.3% (95% CI 2.7%–11.8%). The long-term impacts of war were demonstrated by associated increases in maternal mortality observed for up to 7 years, in under-5 mortality for 3–5 years, in infant mortality for up to 8 years, in DPT vaccination coverage for up to 3 years, and in measles vaccination coverage for up to 2 years. No evidence of association between armed conflict and neonatal mortality or delivery by a skilled birth attendant was found. Study limitations include the ecological study design, which may mask sub-national variation in conflict intensity, and the quality of the underlying data.ConclusionsOur analysis indicates that armed conflict is associated with substantial and persistent excess maternal and child deaths globally, and with reductions in key measures that indicate reduced availability of organised healthcare. These findings highlight the importance of protecting women and children from the indirect harms of conflict, including those relating to health system deterioration and worsening socioeconomic conditions.

Mohammed Jawad and co-workers report on a global analysis of maternal and child health outcomes in situations of armed conflict.     

Paternal Factors and Inequity Associated with Access to Maternal Health Care Service Utilization in Nepal: A Community Based Cross-Sectional Study

Background

The threat of maternal mortality can be reduced by increasing use of maternal health services. Maternal death and access to maternal health care services are inequitable in low and middle income countries.The aim of this study is to assess associated paternal factors and degree of inequity in access to maternal health care service utilization.

Methods

Analysis illustrates on a cross-sectional household survey that followed multistage-cluster sampling. Concentration curve and indices were calculated. Binary logistic regression analysis was executed to account paternal factors associated with the utilization of maternal health services. Path model with structural equation modeling (SEM) examined the predictors of antenatal care (ANC) and institutional delivery.

Results

The finding of this study revealed that 39.9% and 45.5% of the respondents’ wives made ANC visits and utilized institutional delivery services respectively. Men with graduate and higher level of education were more likely (AOR: 5.91, 95% CI; 4.02, 8.70) to have ANC of their wives than men with no education or primary level of education. Men with higher household income (Q5) were more likely (1.99, 95% CI; 1.39, 2.86) to have ANC for their wives. Similarly, higher household income (Q5) also determined (2.74, 95% CI; 1.81, 4.15) for institutional delivery of their wives. Concentration curve and indices also favored rich than the poor. SEM revealed that ANC visit was directly associated to institutional delivery.

Conclusions

Paternal factors like age, household wealth, number of children, ethnicity, education, knowledge of danger sign during pregnancy, and husband’s decision making for seeking maternal and child health care are crucial factors associated to maternal health service utilization. Higher ANC coverage predicts higher utilization of the institutional delivery. Wealthier population is more concentrated to maternal health services. The inequities between the poor and the rich are necessary to be addressed through effective policy and programs.     

Novel coronavirus mitigation measures implemented by radiotherapy centres in low and middle-income countries: a systematic review

BackgroundThe aim of the study was to identify strategies adopted by radiotherapy centres in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to mitigate the effects of COVID-19. Studies summarising COVID-19 mitigation strategies designed and implemented by radiotherapy centres in LMICs to avoid delays, deferrments and interruptions of radiotherapy services are lacking.Materials and methodsA systematic review was conducted and reported in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis guideline. Ovid Embase, Ovid MEDLINE and CINAHL were searched for peer-reviewed articles that reported measures adopted by radiotherapy centres in LMICs to reduce the risk of COVID-19. Information on different strategies were extracted from the included studies and textual narrative synthesis was conducted.ResultsOf 60 articles retrieved, eleven were included. Majority of the studies were conducted in China. Ten of the included studies employed a qualitative design. Four themes were identified: preparing and equipping staff; reinforcing infection prevention and control policies; strengthening coordination and communication; and maintaining physical distancing. Studies reported that radiotherapy centres had: formed COVID-19 response multidisciplinary team; maximised the use of telehealth; adjusted the layout of waiting areas; divided staff into teams; dedicated a room for isolating suspected cases; and adopted triage systems.ConclusionsLocal adaptation of established global strategies coupled with timely development of guidelines, flexibility and innovation have allowed radiotherapy leaders to continue to deliver radiotherapy services to cancer patients in LMICs during the COVID-19 crisis. Robust data collection must be encouraged in LMICs to provide an evidence-based knowledge for use in the event of another pandemic.     

COVID-19 pandemic and patients with cancer: The protocol of a Clinical Oncology center in Tehran,Iran

AimTo provide recommendations for the management of patients with cancer in the COVID-19 era.BackgroundThe current global pandemic of COVID-19 has severely impacted global healthcare systems. Several groups of people are considered high-risk for SARS-CoV-2 infection, including patients with cancer. Therefore, protocols for the better management of these patients during this viral pandemic are necessary. So far, several protocols have been presented regarding the management of patients with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, none of them points to a developing country with limited logistics and facilities.MethodsIn this review, we have provided a summary of recommendations on the management of patients with cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic based on our experience in Shohada-e Tajrish Hospital, Iran.ResultsWe recommend that patients with cancer should be managed in an individualized manner during the COVID-19 pandemic.ConclusionsOur recommendation provides a guide for oncology centers of developing countries for better management of cancer.     

Genetic tracing of HCoV-19 for the re-emerging outbreak of COVID-19 in Beijing,China

The ongoing pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19)caused by a novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2(SARS-CoV-2,also named as 2019-nCoV or HCoV-19)poses an unprecedented threat to public health(Zhu et al.,2020;Wang et al.,2020;Jiang et al.,2020).The novel HCoV-19 virus has rapidly spread into multiple countries across the world since it was first reported in December 2019.The World Health Organization(WHO)declared COVID-19 as a pandemic on 11th March 2020.As of 4th July,over 10 million confirmed COVID-19 cases have been reported in over 200 countries/regions with more than 0.5 million deaths,including 85,287 documented cases and 4,648 deaths in China(WHO,2020a).     

COVID-19 and children: medical impact and collateral damage

Children mostly experience mild SARS-CoV-2 infections, but the extent of paediatric COVID-19 disease differs between geographical regions and the distinct pandemic waves. Not all infections in children are mild, some children even show a strong inflammatory reaction resulting in a multisystem inflammatory syndrome. The assessments of paediatric vaccination depend on the efficacy of protection conferred by vaccination, the risk of adverse reactions and whether children contribute to herd immunity against COVID-19. Children were also the target of consequential public health actions such as school closure which caused substantial harm to children (educational deficits, sociopsychological problems) and working parents. It is, therefore, important to understand the transmission dynamics of SARS-CoV-2 infections by children to assess the efficacy of school closures and paediatric vaccination. The societal restrictions to contain the COVID-19 pandemic had additional negative effects on children’s health, such as missed routine vaccinations, nutritional deprivation and lesser mother–child medical care in developing countries causing increased child mortality as a collateral damage. In this complex epidemiological context, it is important to have an evidence-based approach to public health approaches. The present review summaries pertinent published data on the role of children in the pandemic, whether they are drivers or followers of the infection chains and whether they are (after elderlies) major sufferers or mere bystanders of the COVID-19 pandemic.     

Evaluation of a package of continuum of care interventions for improved maternal,newborn, and child health outcomes and service coverage in Ghana: A cluster-randomized trial

BackgroundIn low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), the continuum of care (CoC) for maternal, newborn, and child health (MNCH) is not always complete. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of an integrated package of CoC interventions on the CoC completion, morbidity, and mortality outcomes of woman–child pairs in Ghana.Methods and findingsThis cluster-randomized controlled trial (ISRCTN: 90618993) was conducted at 3 Health and Demographic Surveillance System (HDSS) sites in Ghana. The primary outcome was CoC completion by a woman–child pair, defined as receiving antenatal care (ANC) 4 times or more, delivery assistance from a skilled birth attendant (SBA), and postnatal care (PNC) 3 times or more. Other outcomes were the morbidity and mortality of women and children. Women received a package of interventions and routine services at health facilities (October 2014 to December 2015). The package comprised providing a CoC card for women, CoC orientation for health workers, and offering women with 24-hour stay at a health facility or a home visit within 48 hours after delivery. In the control arm, women received routine services only. Eligibility criteria were as follows: women who gave birth or had a stillbirth from September 1, 2012 to September 30, 2014 (before the trial period), from October 1, 2014 to December 31, 2015 (during the trial period), or from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2016 (after the trial period). Health service and morbidity outcomes were assessed before and during the trial periods through face-to-face interviews. Mortality was assessed using demographic surveillance data for the 3 periods above. Mixed-effects logistic regression models were used to evaluate the effectiveness as difference in differences (DiD). For health service and morbidity outcomes, 2,970 woman–child pairs were assessed: 1,480 from the baseline survey and 1,490 from the follow-up survey. Additionally, 33,819 cases were assessed for perinatal mortality, 33,322 for neonatal mortality, and 39,205 for maternal mortality. The intervention arm had higher proportions of completed CoC (410/870 [47.1%]) than the control arm (246/620 [39.7%]; adjusted odds ratio [AOR] for DiD = 1.77; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08 to 2.92; p = 0.024). Maternal complications that required hospitalization during pregnancy were lower in the intervention (95/870 [10.9%]) than in the control arm (83/620 [13.4%]) (AOR for DiD = 0.49; 95% CI: 0.29 to 0.83; p = 0.008). Maternal mortality was 8/6,163 live births (intervention arm) and 4/4,068 live births during the trial period (AOR for DiD = 1.60; 95% CI: 0.40 to 6.34; p = 0.507) and 1/4,626 (intervention arm) and 9/3,937 (control arm) after the trial period (AOR for DiD = 0.11; 95% CI: 0.11 to 1.00; p = 0.050). Perinatal and neonatal mortality was not significantly reduced. As this study was conducted in a real-world setting, possible limitations included differences in the type and scale of health facilities and the size of subdistricts, contamination for intervention effectiveness due to the geographic proximity of the arms, and insufficient number of cases for the mortality assessment.ConclusionsThis study found that an integrated package of CoC interventions increased CoC completion and decreased maternal complications requiring hospitalization during pregnancy and maternal mortality after the trial period. It did not find evidence of reduced perinatal and neonatal mortality.Trial registrationThe study protocol was registered in the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Registry (90618993).

Akira Shibanuma and co-workers study a package of maternal and child health interventions in a cluster-randomized trial done in Ghana.     

Trusting the Health System and COVID 19 Restriction Compliance

We examine the extent to which exposure to higher relative COVID-19 mortality (RM), influences health system trust (HST), and whether changes in HST explain the perceived ease of compliance with pandemic restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Drawing on evidence from two representative surveys covering all regions of 28 European countries before and after the first COVID-19 wave, and using a difference in differences strategy together with Coarsened Exact Matching (CEM), we document that living in a region with higher RM during the first wave of the pandemic increased HST. However, the positive effect of RM on HST is driven by individuals over 45 years of age, and the opposite effect is found among younger cohorts. Furthemore, we find that a higher HST reduces the costs of complying with COVID-19 restrictions, but only so long as excess mortality does not exceed the average by more than 20%, at which point the ease of complying with COVID-19 restrictions significantly declines, offsetting the positive effect of trust in the healthcare system. Our interpretation of these estimates is that a higher RM is interpreted as a risk signal among those over 45, and as a signal of health-care system failure among younger age individuals.     

Learning from the COVID-19 pandemic to strengthen routine immunization systems

Kate Causey and Jonathan F Mosser discuss what can be learnt from the observed impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on routine immunisation systems.

In the final months of 2021, deaths due to the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) surpassed 5 million globally [1]. Available data suggest that even this staggering figure may be a substantial underestimate of the true toll of the pandemic [2]. Beyond mortality, it may take years to fully quantify the direct and indirect impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic such as disruptions in preventive care services. In an accompanying research study in PLOS Medicine, McQuaid and colleagues report on the uptake of routine childhood immunizations in 2020 in Scotland and England during major pandemic-related lockdowns [3]. This adds to a growing body of literature quantifying the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on routine health services and childhood immunization [4,5], which provides important opportunities to learn from early pandemic experiences as immunization systems face ongoing challenges.McQuaid and colleagues compared weekly or monthly data on vaccine uptake in Scotland and England from January to December of 2020 to the rates observed in 2019 to estimate the changes in uptake before, during, and after COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns in each country. The authors included 2 different preschool immunizations, each with multiple doses. They found significantly increased uptake within 4 weeks of eligibility during the lockdown and postlockdown periods in Scotland for all 5 vaccine dose combinations examined: During lockdown, percentage point increases ranged from 1.3% to 14.3%. In England, there were significant declines in uptake during the prelockdown, lockdown, and postlockdown periods for all 4 vaccine dose combinations examined. However, declines during lockdown were small, with percentage point decreases ranging from −0.5% to −2.1%. Due to the nature of the data available, the authors were unable to account for possible seasonal variation in vaccine delivery, control for important individual-level confounders or effect modifiers such as child sex and parental educational attainment, or directly compare outcomes across the 2 countries.These findings stand in contrast to the documented experience of many other countries, where available data suggest historic disruptions in routine childhood vaccination coverage, particularly during the first months of pandemic-related lockdowns [5,6]. Supply side limitations such as delayed shipments of vaccines and supplies [7], inadequate personal protective equipment [8], staff shortages [9], and delayed or canceled campaigns and introductions [9] threatened vaccine delivery. Furthermore, fear of exposure to COVID-19 at vaccination centers [10], misinformation about vaccine safety [8], and lockdown-related limitations on travel to facilities [9,10] reduced demand. In polls of country experts conducted by WHO, UNICEF, and Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance throughout the second quarter of 2020, 126 of 170 countries reported at least some disruption to routine immunization programs [10,11]. Global estimates suggest that millions more children missed doses of important vaccines than would have in the absence of the COVID-19 pandemic [5,6]. While many vaccine programs showed remarkable resilience in the second half of 2020, with rates of vaccination returning to or even exceeding prepandemic levels [5,6], disruptions to immunization services persisted into 2021 in many countries [12].As the authors discuss, it is critical to pinpoint the specific program policies and strategies that contributed to increased uptake in Scotland and only small declines in England and, more broadly, to the rapid recovery of vaccination rates observed in many other countries. McQuaid and colleagues cite work suggesting that increased flexibility in parental working patterns during lockdowns, providing mobile services or public transport to vaccine centers, and sending phone- and mail-based reminders are strategies that may have improved uptake of timely vaccination in Scotland during this period [13]. Similarly, immunization programs around the world have employed a broad range of strategies to maintain or increase vaccination during the pandemic. Leaders in Senegal, Paraguay, and Sri Lanka designed and conducted media campaigns to emphasize the importance of childhood immunization even during lockdown [8,14,15]. Although many programs delayed mass campaigns in the spring of 2020, multiple countries were able to implement campaigns by the summer of 2020 [8,16–20]. In each of these examples, leaders responded quickly to meet the unique challenges presented by the COVID-19 pandemic in their communities.Increased data collection and tracking systems are essential for efficient and effective responses as delivery programs face challenges. When concern arose for pandemic-related disruptions to immunization services, public health decision-makers in Scotland and England responded by increasing the frequency and level of detail in reports of vaccine uptake and by making these data available for planning and research. The potential for robust data systems to inform real-time decision-making is not limited to high-income countries. For instance, the Nigerian National Health Management Information System released an extensive online dashboard shortly after the onset of the pandemic, documenting the impact of COVID-19 on dozens of indicators of health service uptake, including 16 related to immunization [21]. Vaccination data systems that track individual children and doses, such as the reminder system in Scotland, allow for highly targeted responses. Similarly, in Senegal, Ghana, and in Karachi, Pakistan, healthcare workers have relied on existing or newly implemented tracking systems to identify children who have missed doses and provide text message and/or phone call reminders [8,22,23]. Investing in robust routine data systems allows for rapid scale-up of data collection, targeted services to those who miss doses, and a more informed response when vaccine delivery challenges arise.Policy and program decision-makers must learn from the observed impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on health systems and vaccine delivery. The study by McQuaid and colleagues provides further evidence that vaccination programs in England and Scotland leveraged existing strengths and identified novel strategies to mitigate disruptions and deliver vaccines in the early stages of the pandemic. However, the challenges posed by the pandemic to routine immunization services continue. To mitigate the risk of outbreaks of measles and other vaccine-preventable diseases, strategies are needed to maintain and increase coverage, while ensuring that children who missed vaccines during the pandemic are quickly caught up. The accompanying research study provides important insights into 2 countries where services were preserved—and even increased—in the early pandemic. To meet present and future challenges, we must learn from early pandemic successes such as those in Scotland and England, tailor solutions to improve vaccine uptake, and strengthen data systems to support improved decision-making.     

La representación de los mayores en los medios durante la pandemia COVID-19: ¿hacia un refuerzo del edadismo?

Background and objectiveThe COVID-19 pandemic affects various age groups differently, with most deaths concentrated among the older population and those with previous health conditions. This has led to a greater presence of older people in the agenda setting of all the media. This article aims to analyse these discourses and representations related to older people as presented in the headlines of publications disseminated in 2 national newspapers (ABC and El País) during the most critical phase of the pandemic in Spain.Materials and methodsAn analysis was made of 501 headlines related to older people and the COVID-19 pandemic (380 from ABC, and 121 from El País) from the perspective of the Critical Discourse Studies (Van Dijk, 2003), as well as carrying out a content analysis.Results71.4% of the headlines represented the Older adults were represented unfavourably in 71.4% of the headlines, with them being presented as a homogeneous group and associating them with deaths, deficiencies in residential care, or extreme vulnerability. The presence of certain potentially derogatory or improper terms (elderly, grandparents) was consistent with this negative representation.ConclusionsIn light of these results, it is discussed to what extent the COVID-19 pandemic may reinforce an ageist narrative of the older people, based on frailty, decline, and dependency, which may justify discriminatory practices directed at this sector of the population.     

Exposure to conflicts and the continuum of maternal healthcare: Analyses of pooled cross-sectional data for 452,192 women across 49 countries and 82 surveys

BackgroundViolent conflicts are observed in many parts of the world and have profound impacts on the lives of exposed individuals. The limited evidence available from specific country or region contexts suggest that conflict exposure may reduce health service utilization and have adverse affects on health. This study focused on identifying the association between conflict exposure and continuum of care (CoC) services that are crucial for achieving improvements in reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health and nutrition (RMNCHN).Methods and findingsWe combined data from 2 sources, the Demographic Health Surveys (DHS) and the Uppsala Conflict Data Program’s (UCDP) Georeferenced Event Dataset, for a sample of 452,192 women across 49 countries observed over the period 1997 to 2018. We utilized 2 consistent measures of conflict—incidence and intensity—and analyzed their association with maternal CoC in 4 key components: (i) at least 1 antenatal care (ANC) visit; (ii) 4 or more ANC visits; (iii) 4 or more ANC visits and institutional delivery; and (iv) 4 or more ANC visits, institutional delivery, and receipt of postnatal care (PNC) either for the mother or the child within 48 hours after birth. To identify the association between conflict exposure and components of CoC, we estimated binary logistic regressions, controlling for a large set of individual and household-level characteristics and year-of-survey and country/province fixed-effects. This empirical setup allows us to draw comparisons among observationally similar women residing in the same locality, thereby mitigating the concerns over unobserved heterogeneity. Around 39.6% (95% CI: 39.5% to 39.7%) of the sample was exposed to some form of violent conflict at the time of their pregnancy during the study period (2003 to 2018). Although access to services decreased for each additional component of CoC in maternal healthcare for all women, the dropout rate was significantly higher among women who have been exposed to conflict, relative to those who have not had such exposure. From logistic regression estimates, we observed that relative to those without exposure to conflict, the odds of utilization of each of the components of CoC was lower among those women who were exposed to at least 1 violent conflict. We estimated odds ratios of 0.86 (95% CI: 0.82 to 0.91, p < 0.001) for at least 1 ANC; 0.95 (95% CI: 0.91 to 0.98, p < 0.005) for 4 or more ANC; and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.89 to 0.96, p < 0.001) for 4 or more ANC and institutional delivery. We showed that both the incidence of exposure to conflict as well as its intensity have profound negative implications for CoC. Study limitations include the following: (1) We could not extend the CoC scale beyond PNC due to inconsistent definitions and the lack of availability of data for all 49 countries across time. (2) The measure of conflict intensity used in this study is based on the number of deaths due to the absence of information on other types of conflict-related harms.ConclusionsThis study showed that conflict exposure is statistically significantly and negatively associated with utilization of maternal CoC services, in each component of the CoC scale. These findings have highlighted the challenges in achieving the Sustainable Development Goal 3 in conflict settings, and the need for more concerted efforts in ensuring CoC, to mitigate its negative implications on maternal and child health.

Anu Rammohan and co-workers study associations between exposure to violent conflicts and take-up of maternal health care services across countries.     

Factors associated with the unwillingness of Jordanians,Palestinians and Syrians to be vaccinated against COVID-19

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic is expected to continue to inflect immense burdens of morbidity and mortality, not to mention the sever disruption of societies and economies worldwide. One of the major challenges to managing COVID-19 pandemic is the negative attitudes towards vaccines and the uncertainty or unwillingness to receive vaccinations. We evaluated the predictors and factors behind the negative attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccines in 3 countries in the Middle East.MethodsA cross-sectional, self-administered survey was conducted between the 1^st and the 25^th of December, 2020. Representative sample of 8619 adults residing in Jordan, West Bank, and Syria, completed the survey via the Web or via telephone interview. The survey intended to assess intent to be vaccinated against COVID-19 and to identify predictors of and reasons among participants unwilling/hesitant to get vaccinated.ResultsThe total of the 8619 participants included in this study were the ones who answered the question on the intent to be vaccinated. Overall, 32.2% of participants (n = 2772) intended to be vaccinated, 41.6% (n = 3589) didn’t intend to get vaccinated, and 26.2% (n = 2258) were not sure. The main factors associated with the willingness to take the vaccine (yes responses) included females, 18–35 years old, Syrians and Jordanians, a large family size, and having received a flu vaccine last year. Reasons for vaccine hesitancy included the lack of rigorous evaluation of the vaccine by the FDA and the possible long-term health risks associated with the vaccines (the wait-and-see approach).ConclusionThis survey, conducted in December when the number of cases and deaths per day due to COVID-19 were at or near peak levels of the initial surge in the three regions under investigation. The survey revealed that most of survey’s participants (67.8%) were unwilling/hesitant to get vaccinated against COVID-19 with the lack of trust in the approval process of the vaccine being the main concern; the two main characteristics of those participants were more than 35 years old and participants holding a Bachelor’s degree or higher. Targeted and multi-pronged efforts will be needed to increase acceptance of COVID-19 vaccine in Jordan, West Bank and Syria.