...
首页> 外文期刊>Frontiers in Public Health >Early COVID-19 Interventions Failed to Replicate 1918 St. Louis vs. Philadelphia Outcomes in the United States
【24h】

Early COVID-19 Interventions Failed to Replicate 1918 St. Louis vs. Philadelphia Outcomes in the United States

机译:早期Covid-19干预措施未能复制1918年在美国的费城成果

获取原文

摘要

The Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has elicited an abrupt pause in the United States in multiple sectors of commerce and social activity. As the US faces this health crisis, the magnitude and rigor of their initial public health response was unprecedented. As a response, the entire nation shutdown at the state-level for the duration of a ~1–3 months. These public health interventions, however, were not arbitrarily decided, but rather, implemented as a result of evidence-based practices. These practices were a result of lessons learned during the 1918 influenza pandemic and the city-level non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) taken across the US. During the 1918 pandemic, two model cities, St. Louis, MO, and Philadelphia, PA, carried out two different approaches to address the spreading disease, which resulted in two distinctly different outcomes. Our group has evaluated the state-level public health response adopted by states across the US, with a focus on New York, California, Florida, and Texas, and compared the effectiveness of reducing the spread of COVID-19. Our assessments show that while the states mentioned above benefited from the implementations of early preventative measures, they inadequately replicated the desired outcomes observed in St. Louis during the 1918 crisis. Our study indicates that there are other factors, including health disparities that may influence the effectiveness of public health interventions applied. Identifying more specific health determinants may help implement targeted interventions aimed at preventing the spread of COVID-19 and improving health equity.
机译:2019年冠状病毒疾病(Covid-19)大流行引发了美国的多个商业和社会活动的突然停顿。随着美国面临这种健康危机,初始公共卫生反应的严格和严谨是前所未有的。作为回应,整个国家在状态级关闭持续时间〜1-3个月。然而,这些公共卫生干预措施没有被任意决定,而是由于基于证据的做法而实施。这些做法是在1918年甲型流感大流行和城市级非药物干预(NPI)的经验教训的结果。在1918年的大流行病中,两种模式,圣路易斯,莫和费城,PA,进行了两种不同的方法来解决传播疾病,导致两种明显不同的结果。本集团已评估各国各国通过的国家级公共卫生反应,专注于纽约,加利福尼亚州,佛罗里达州和德克萨斯州,并比较减少Covid-19传播的有效性。我们的评估表明,虽然上述国家受益于早期预防措施的实施,但在1918年危机期间,它们不充分地复制了圣路易斯在圣路易斯观察到的预期成果。我们的研究表明,还有其他因素,包括可能影响适用公共卫生干预措施的卫生差异。确定更具体的健康决定簇可能有助于实施旨在防止Covid-19传播和改善健康股权的有针对性的干预措施。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号