Everyday capabilities were a path to resilience during COVID-19: A case study of five countries.

COVID-19 demanded urgent responses by all countries, with wide variations in the scope and sustainability of those responses. Scholarship on resilience has increasingly emphasized relational considerations such as norms and power and how they influence health systems' responses to evolving challenges. In this study, we explored what influenced countries' national pandemic responses over time considering a country's capacity to test for COVID-19. To identify countries for inclusion, we used daily reports of COVID-19 cases and testing from 184 countries between January 21st, 2020 to December 31st, 2020. Countries reporting test data consistently and for at least 105 days were included, yielding a sample of 52 countries. We then sampled five countries representing different geographies, income levels, and governance structures (Belgium, Ethiopia, India, Israel, Peru) and conducted semi-structured key informant interviews with stakeholders working in, or deeply familiar, with national responses. Across these five countries, we found that existing health systems capacities and political leadership determined how responses unfolded, while emergency plans or pandemic preparedness documents were not fit-for-purpose. While all five countries were successful at reducing COVID-19 infections at a specific moment in the pandemic, political economy factors complicated the ability to sustain responses, with all countries experiencing larger waves of the virus in 2021 or 2022. Our findings emphasize the continued importance of foundational public health and health systems capacities, bolstered by clear leadership and multisectoral coordination functions. Even in settings with high-level political leadership and a strong multisectoral response, informants wished they-and their country's health system-were more prepared to address the pandemic and maintain an effective response over time. Our findings challenge emergency preparedness as the dominant frame in pandemic preparedness and call for a continued emphasis on health systems strengthening to respond to future health shocks-and a pandemic moving to endemic status.

Past local government health spending was not correlated with COVID-19 control in US counties.

CONTEXT: Wide variation in state and county health spending prior to 2020 enables tests of whether historically better state and locally funded counties achieved faster control over COVID-19 in the first 6 months of the pandemic in the Unites States prior to federal supplemental funding. OBJECTIVE: We used time-to-event and generalized linear models to examine the association between pre-pandemic state-level public health spending, county-level non-hospital health spending, and effective COVID-19 control at the county level. We include 2,775 counties that reported 10 or more COVID-19 cases between January 22, 2020, and July 19, 2020, in the analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Control of COVID-19 was defined by: (i) elapsed time in days between the 10th case and the day of peak incidence of a county's local epidemic, among counties that bent their case curves, and (ii) doubling time of case counts within the first 30 days of a county's local epidemic for all counties that reported 10 or more cases. RESULTS: Only 26% of eligible counties had bent their case curve in the first 6 months of the pandemic. Government health spending at the county level was not associated with better COVID-19 control in terms of either a shorter time to peak in survival analyses, or doubling time in generalized linear models. State-level public spending on hazard preparation and response was associated with a shorter time to peak among counties that were able to bend their case incidence curves. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing resource availability for public health in local jurisdictions without thoughtful attention to bolstering the foundational capabilities inside health departments is unlikely to be sufficient to prepare the country for future outbreaks or other public health emergencies.

The wealth gradient and the effect of COVID-19 restrictions on income loss, food insecurity and health care access in four sub-Saharan African geographies.

INTRODUCTION: While there has been considerable analysis of the health and economic effects of COVID-19 in the Global North, representative data on the distribution and depth of social and economic impacts in Africa has been more limited. METHODS: We analyze household data collected prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and during the first wave of COVID in four African countries. We evaluate the short-term changes to household economic status and assess women's access to health care during the first wave of COVID-19 in nationally representative samples of women aged 15-49 in Kenya and Burkina Faso, and in sub-nationally representative samples of women aged 15-49 in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo and Lagos, Nigeria. We examine prevalence and distribution of household income loss, food insecurity, and access to health care during the COVID-19 lockdowns across residence and pre-pandemic wealth categories. We then regress pre-pandemic individual and household sociodemographic characteristics on the three outcomes. RESULTS: In three out of four samples, over 90% of women reported partial or complete loss of household income since the beginning of the coronavirus restrictions. Prevalence of food insecurity ranged from 17.0% (95% CI 13.6-20.9) to 39.8% (95% CI 36.0-43.7), and the majority of women in food insecure households reported increases in food insecurity during the COVID-19 restriction period. In contrast, we did not find significant barriers to accessing health care during COVID restrictions. Between 78·3% and 94·0% of women who needed health care were able successfully access it. When we examined pre-pandemic sociodemographic correlates of the outcomes, we found that the income shock of COVID-19 was substantial and distributed similarly across wealth groups, but food insecurity was concentrated among poorer households. Contrary to a-priori expectations, we find little evidence of women experiencing barriers to health care, but there is significant need for food support.

The Role of Public Health Expenditures in COVID-19 control: Evidence from Local Governments in England.

For over 150 years the local health departments of England have been critical in controlling 19th and 20th century infectious epidemics. However, recent administrative changes have hollowed out their flexibility to serve communities. We use administrative data on past budgetary allocations per capita to public health departments at upper tier local areas (UTLAs) of England to examine whether public health funding levels were correlated with more rapid control of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic between March and July of 2020. The dependent variable was the number of days between a UTLA's 10th case of COVID-19 and the day when new cases per 100,000 peaked and began to decline. Our models controlled for regional socio-economic factors. We found no correlation between local public health expenditure and the speed of control of COVID-19. However, overall public expenditure allocated to improve local areas helped reduce time to reach peak. Contrary to expectation, more dense areas such as London experienced shorter duration. Higher income areas had more rapid success in accelerating the time of the first peak in the first wave of their local COVID-19 incidence. We contribute to understanding the impact of how public expenditure and socio-economic factors affect an epidemic.