Improving the accuracy of blood pressure measuring devices in Australia: a modelled return on investment study.

The VALID BP project was initiated to increase the availability of validated blood pressure measuring devices (BPMDs). The goal is to eliminate non validated BPMDs and minimise over- and underdiagnosis of hypertension caused by inaccurate readings. This study was undertaken to assess the potential return on investment in the VALID BP project. The Framework to Assess the Impact of Translational Health Research was applied to the VALID BP project. This paper focuses on the implementation of the cost benefit analysis aspect of this framework to monetise past research investment and model future research costs, implementation costs, and benefits. Analysis was based on reasoned assumptions about potential impacts from availability and use of validated BPMDs (assuming an end goal of 100% validated BPMDs available in Australia by 2028) and improved skills leading to more accurate BP measurement. After 5 years, with 20% attribution of benefits, there is a potential $1.14-$1.30 return for every dollar spent if the proportion of validated BPMDs and staff trained in proper BP measurement technique increased from 20% to 60%. After eight years (2020-2028) and assuming universal validation and training coverage, the returns would be between $2.70 and $3.20 per dollar spent (not including cost of side effects of unnecessary medication or downstream patient impacts from unmanaged hypertension). This modelled economic analysis indicates there will be positive downstream economic benefits if the availability of validated BPMDs is increased. The findings support ongoing efforts toward a universal regulatory framework for BPMDs and can be considered within more detailed future economic analyses.

Finding the way forward: COVID-19 vaccination progress in Germany, Austria and Switzerland.

Objectives: : This paper presents an overview of the procurement and deployment of COVID-19 vaccinations in Germany, Austria and Switzerland (DACH) from the success of the first vaccine trials until the end of August 2021. Data regarding vaccination procurement and deployment is presented, followed by an analysis of the challenges these countries face in improving their vaccination rates. Methods: : A review and analysis of available data from the DACH countries was conducted. Data was collected from official government sources whenever possible and supplemented by information from international databases and local reports. The data was analyzed to identify common patterns as well as divergences across the DACH region, especially as they relate to vaccine hesitancy and health policy. Results: : Following initial global supply problems, the DACH countries were largely successful at administering vaccinations to their populations. However, by the end of August 2021 their vaccination progress had plateaued. This was primarily due to vaccine hesitancy in the region, which is correlated with a multitude of complex factors. These factors need to be better understood before this issue can be effectively addressed. Unlike other countries, the DACH countries have not (yet) used financial incentives or mandates to increase vaccination rates. Conclusions: : The DACH countries displayed effective governance in their deployment of COVID-19 vaccines, but vaccine hesitancy is slowing progress. Due to various social and political factors, Germany, Austria and Switzerland have not been able to employ effective policy levers to overcome this barrier and a more nuanced strategy will have to be developed. Public Interest Summary: : Germany, Austria and Switzerland (DACH) were largely successful at procuring COVID-19 vaccine doses and administering them to their populations. After the first doses were acquired, their vaccination rates continued to steadily rise, but progress began to slow down substantially by August 2021 due in part to vaccine hesitancy. Unlike in other countries, the DACH governments have not been able to implement vaccine mandates to try and overcome this issue due to their specific political and social circumstances. A deeper understanding of the factors driving vaccine hesitancy in the region will be required before effective solutions can be found.

Europe's Covid-19 outliers: German, Austrian and Swiss policy responses during the early stages of the 2020 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: This paper presents an overview of the policy responses in Germany, Austria and Switzerland (the DACH region) during the early stages of the 2020 Covid-19 pandemic (Feb.-June 2020), which provides the context for a comparative policy analysis. This analysis provides insight into the possible implications of the policy actions taken in the region. METHODS: An in-depth review and analysis of available data from the DACH countries was conducted. Data was collected from official government sources whenever possible, and supplemented by information from international databases and local reports. The data was then analyzed to identify common patterns as well as significant divergences across the DACH region, especially in the area of health policy and technology use. RESULTS: The DACH countries faced similar epidemiological situations during the Covid-19 pandemic, and were largely successful at preventing many of the negative impacts seen across the rest of Europe. Although many differences in health systems and governance structures existed, the policy responses in all three countries managed to address some of the most important factors in containing an infectious disease outbreak of this magnitude. CONCLUSIONS: The actions taken by all three DACH countries appear to have been largely successful in reducing the health impact of Covid-19, allowing a return to normal economic activities much earlier than in neighboring countries. However, the implications of certain policies related to economic resilience and health system capacity cannot yet be fully evaluated and may even prove to have negative impacts into the future.

An analysis of the policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in France, Belgium, and Canada.

OBJECTIVES: This paper presents an overview and comparative analysis of the epidemiological situation and the policy responses in France, Belgium, and Canada during the early stages of the 2020 Covid-19 pandemic (Feb.-Aug. 2020). These three countries are compared because they represent a spectrum of different governance structures while also being OECD nations that are similar in many other respects. METHODS: A rapid review of primary data from the three countries was conducted. Data was collected from official government documents whenever possible, supplemented by information from international databases and local media reports. The data was then analysed to identify common patterns as well as significant divergences across the three countries, especially in the areas of health policy and technology use. RESULTS: France, Belgium and Canada faced differing epidemiological situations during the Covid-19 pandemic, and the wide variety of policy actions taken appears to be linked to existing governance and healthcare structures. The varying degrees of federalism and regional autonomy across the three countries highlight the different constraints faced by national policy-makers within different governance models. CONCLUSIONS: The actions taken by all three countries appear to have been largely dictated by existing health system capacity, with increasing federalism associated with more fragmented strategies and less coordination across jurisdictions. However, the implications of certain policies related to economic resilience and health system capacity cannot yet be fully evaluated and may even prove to have net negative impacts into the future.