Unpacking the impact of COVID-19 on child immunization: evidence from Ghana.

BACKGROUND: With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, governments implemented social distancing regulations to limit the spread of the disease. Some health experts warned that these measures could negatively affect access to essential health services, such as routine childhood immunizations. Others noted that without these regulations, COVID-19 cases would increase, leading to overburdened health systems. METHODS: We analyze four years (2018-2021) of monthly administrative data on childhood immunizations in all administrative districts in Ghana and exploit variations in social distancing regulations across districts. Given variations in social distancing regulations across Ghanaian districts, we can further differentiate between the effect of public lockdowns and the effect of the pandemic. RESULTS: We find that child immunizations in Ghana declined by 6% during the public lockdown in April 2020, but the country compensated with higher vaccination rates starting in June, and immunization services recovered to pre-pandemic growth levels by 2021. Time-critical vaccines, such as polio, were not affected at all. We do find a substantially larger disruption in April 2020 (14%) and a slower recovery in 2020 in the 40 lockdown-affected districts. Interestingly, vaccination rates already decreased in February and March by about 5% before the public lockdown and before the pandemic had reached Ghana, but with the pandemic already spreading globally and in the news. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that the negative effect on child immunization was less severe and shorter than predicted by experts. Fear of COVID-19 and delayed vaccination campaigns had a substantial impact on childhood immunization while rising COVID-19 cases and moderate social distancing regulations did not seem to affect immunization rates.

Toward mandatory health insurance in low-income countries? An analysis of claims data in Tanzania.

Many low-income countries are in the process of scaling up health insurance with the goal of achieving universal coverage. However, little is known about the usage and financial sustainability of mandatory health insurance. This study analyzes 26 million claims submitted to the Tanzanian National Health Insurance Fund (NHIF), which covers two million public servants for whom public insurance is mandatory, to understand insurance usage patterns, cost drivers, and financial sustainability. We find that in 2016, half of policyholders used a health service within a single year, with an average annual cost of 33 US$ per policyholder. About 10% of the population was responsible for 80% of the health costs, and women, middle-age and middle-income groups had the highest costs. Out of 7390 health centers, only five health centers are responsible for 30% of total costs. Estimating the expected health expenditures for the entire population based on the NHIF cost structure, we find that for a sustainable national scale-up, policy makers will have to decide between reducing the health benefit package or increasing revenues. We also show that the cost structure of a mandatory insurance scheme in a low-income country differs substantially from high-income settings. Replication studies for other countries are warranted.

Economic Recovery but Stagnating Mental Health During a Global Pandemic? Evidence from Ghana and South Africa.

Ghana and South Africa proactively implemented lockdowns very early in the pandemic. We analyze a three-wave panel of households in Accra and Greater Johannesburg to study the mental and economic well-being of the urban poor between the COVID-19 lockdown and the "new normal" one year later. We find that even if economic well-being has mostly recovered, life satisfaction has only improved slightly and feelings of depression are again at lockdown levels one year into the pandemic. While economic factors are strongly correlated with mental health and explain the differences in mental health between South Africa and Ghana, increasing worries about the future and limited knowledge about the pandemic (both countries) as well as deteriorating physical health (South Africa) and trust in government (Ghana) explain why mental health has not recovered. Therefore, we need broad and country-specific policies, beyond financial support, to accelerate the post-pandemic recovery of the urban poor.

Managing the COVID-19 pandemic in poor urban neighborhoods: The case of Accra and Johannesburg.

Without a vaccine, practicing social distancing and protective hygiene are the most effective measures to curb the spread of COVID-19. In order to understand how the urban poor mitigate their risk of infection, we conducted a survey with more than 1,400 poor households in two of the African cities with the most COVID-19 infections, Accra and Greater Johannesburg, early in the pandemic, during lockdowns of public life. We find that many of the urban poor already engage in the appropriate hygienic behavior and follow social distancing rules. However, despite citywide lockdowns, about 25-40% of people still report attending large gatherings, 10-20% report receiving guests at home, and 30-35% report leaving the house more than once per week. Lack of cooperation with governmental regulations seems to be more related to a lack of infrastructure or poverty rather than unwillingness to engage in behavioral change. Interestingly, even with the stricter lockdown in South Africa, people are at least equally likely to deviate from social distancing rules. Our results indicate that more South African respondents perceive their government's actions as too extreme and underestimate COVID-19 cases in their country. About half of the sample in both countries report knowing (mainly through TV) about current COVID-19 case numbers. Most participants know that coughing is a symptom, but only half mention fever and difficulty breathing, and very few people mention tiredness. Ghanaians seem to be somewhat better informed. While lack of information is an issue, misinformation appears to be limited. We conclude that a costly shutdown of public life is only effective-and might even be prevented-with a well-informed population, who perceives their government's actions as appropriate and who has access to the infrastructure required to follow WHO safety regulations.