Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Gesundheitsoekonomie Und Qualitaetsmanagement ; 27(06):306-312, 2022.
Article in English | Web of Science | ID: covidwho-2307397

ABSTRACT

Coping with the COVID-19 pandemic has required far-reaching containment measures. In order to classify the effects of German pandemic policy, a European view can be helpful. We take up the concept of excess mortality to gain an impression of the pandemic course so far and, implicitly, of pandemic management in the EU-27 countries and primarily Germany. Overall, Germany has come through the pandemic comparatively well so far. This is probably also due to the measures taken, the effectiveness of which, however, cannot be determined in detail. In order to be prepared for future pandemics, clear responsibilities and decision-making structures must be defined and an accompanying pandemic monitoring system established.

2.
Gesundheitsokonomie und Qualitatsmanagement ; 27(6):306-312, 2022.
Article in German | EMBASE | ID: covidwho-2186337

ABSTRACT

Coping with the COVID-19 pandemic has required far-reaching containment measures. In order to classify the effects of German pandemic policy, a European view can be helpful. We take up the concept of excess mortality to gain an impression of the pandemic course so far and, implicitly, of pandemic management in the EU-27 countries and primarily Germany. Overall, Germany has come through the pandemic comparatively well so far. This is probably also due to the measures taken, the effectiveness of which, however, cannot be determined in detail. In order to be prepared for future pandemics, clear responsibilities and decision-making structures must be defined and an accompanying pandemic monitoring system established. Copyright © 2022 Georg Thieme Verlag. All rights reserved.

3.
Front Public Health ; 10: 888123, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1993855

ABSTRACT

Background and Objectives: The official number of daily cases and deaths are the most prominent indicators used to plan actions against the COVID-19 pandemic but are insufficient to see the real impact. Official numbers vary due to testing policy, reporting methods, etc. Therefore, critical interventions are likely to lose their effectiveness and better-standardized indicators like excess deaths/mortality are needed. In this study, excess deaths in Istanbul were examined and a web-based monitor was developed. Methods: Daily all-cause deaths data between January 1, 2015- November 11, 2021 in Istanbul is used to estimate the excess deaths. Compared to the pre-pandemic period, the % increase in the number of deaths was calculated as the ratio of excess deaths to expected deaths (P-Scores). The ratio of excess deaths to official figures (T) was also examined. Results: The total number of official and excess deaths in Istanbul are 24.218 and 37.514, respectively. The ratio of excess deaths to official deaths is 1.55. During the first three death waves, maximum P-Scores were 71.8, 129.0, and 116.3% respectively. Conclusion: Excess mortality in Istanbul is close to the peak scores in Europe. 38.47% of total excess deaths could be considered as underreported or indirect deaths. To re-optimize the non-pharmaceutical interventions there is a need to monitor the real impact beyond the official figures. In this study, such a monitoring tool was created for Istanbul. The excess deaths are more reliable than official figures and it can be used as a gold standard to estimate the impact more precisely.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Europe , Humans , Pandemics , Turkey/epidemiology
4.
BMC Med Res Methodol ; 21(1): 164, 2021 08 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1352643

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: An essential aspect of preventing further COVID-19 outbreaks and to learn for future pandemics is the evaluation of different political strategies, which aim at reducing transmission of and mortality due to COVID-19. One important aspect in this context is the comparison of attributable mortality. METHODS: We give a comprehensive overview of six epidemiological measures that are used to quantify COVID-19 attributable mortality (p-score, standardized mortality ratio, absolute number of excess deaths, per capita rate, z-score and the population attributable fraction). RESULTS: By defining the six measures based on observed and expected deaths, we explain their relationship. Moreover, three publicly available data examples serve to illustrate the interpretational strengths and weaknesses of the various measures. Finally, we give recommendation which measures are suitable for an evaluation of public health strategies against COVID-19. The R code to reproduce the results is available as online supplementary material. CONCLUSION: The number of excess deaths should be always reported together with the population attributable fraction, the p-score or the standardized mortality ratio instead of a per capita rate. For a complete picture of COVID-19 attributable mortality, quantifying and communicating its relative burden also to a lay audience is of major importance.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Disease Outbreaks , Humans , Mortality , Pandemics , Public Health , SARS-CoV-2
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL