Skip to main content
Download PDF

Associations between the stringency of COVID-19 containment policies and health service disruptions in 10 countries

BMC Health Services Research volume 23, Article number: 363 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Disruptions in essential health services during the COVID-19 pandemic have been reported in several countries. Yet, patterns in health service disruption according to country responses remain unclear. In this paper, we investigate associations between the stringency of COVID-19 containment policies and disruptions in 31 health services in 10 low- middle- and high-income countries in 2020.

Methods

Using routine health information systems and administrative data from 10 countries (Chile, Ethiopia, Ghana, Haiti, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Mexico, Nepal, South Africa, South Korea, and Thailand) we estimated health service disruptions for the period of April to December 2020 by dividing monthly service provision at national levels by the average service provision in the 15 months pre-COVID (January 2019-March 2020). We used the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker (OxCGRT) index and multi-level linear regression analyses to assess associations between the stringency of restrictions and health service disruptions over nine months. We extended the analysis by examining associations between 11 individual containment or closure policies and health service disruptions. Models were adjusted for COVID caseload, health service category and country GDP and included robust standard errors.

Findings

Chronic disease care was among the most affected services. Regression analyses revealed that a 10% increase in the mean stringency index was associated with a 3.3 percentage-point (95% CI -3.9, -2.7) reduction in relative service volumes. Among individual policies, curfews, and the presence of a state of emergency, had the largest coefficients and were associated with 14.1 (95% CI -19.6, 8.7) and 10.7 (95% CI -12.7, -8.7) percentage-point lower relative service volumes, respectively. In contrast, number of COVID-19 cases in 2020 was not associated with health service disruptions in any model.

Conclusions

Although containment policies were crucial in reducing COVID-19 mortality in many contexts, it is important to consider the indirect effects of these restrictions. Strategies to improve the resilience of health systems should be designed to ensure that populations can continue accessing essential health care despite the presence of containment policies during future infectious disease outbreaks.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic and in an effort to reduce the spread of infections, countries imposed a series of non-pharmaceutical interventions, such as stay-at-home orders, curfews and quarantines. These measures and policies were known as “lockdowns”, or COVID-19 containment or closure policies. By the end of March 2020 more than 100 countries had instituted either a full or partial lockdown [1].

An increasing breadth of literature has shown disruptions in health services during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic with heterogeneity in the degree and duration of these disruptions [2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16]. Nonetheless, studies found no clear pattern in health service disruptions according to pandemic intensity (e.g., number of COVID cases or deaths) or by country characteristics, income, or health system characteristics [2, 13, 14]. Disruptions in health service utilization during the pandemic could be caused by a combination of factors including a decrease in health facility capacity (due to reallocation of staff or other resources to COVID-19 wards, staff getting infected, or staff burnout), patients choosing to defer medical care due to concerns about exposure to the virus, or people’s inability to pay for medical care from loss of income or employment. The barriers imposed by COVID-19 containment policies such as public transportation closures, stay-at-home requirements or restrictions on internal movement, could also result in declines in non-COVID health care utilization [17,18,19].

Few studies have sought to understand the relation between the stringency of COVID-19 containment policies and the level of health service disruptions. In 18 low- and middle-income countries, a study found a significant relationship between the stringency of COVID-19 mobility restrictions and disruptions in outpatient consultations, child vaccinations, and the fourth antenatal care visit, whereby a standard deviation in the mobility restrictions stringency was associated with a 3.9 percent reduction in outpatient consultation volume on average [16]. In 11 sub-Saharan African countries, the stringency of COVID-19 containment policies was significantly associated with reductions in outpatient visits and inpatient admissions, where a 10 percentage points increase in the stringency index was associated with a 3.1–3.6 percentage points reduction in these two services [14]. Other studies have looked at country or health-service specific relationships between containment policies and service disruptions. In South Africa, significant reductions in child health visits and HIV services were observed during varying levels of lockdowns [10, 15]. In Nepal, significant increases in certain health services were seen after lockdowns were lifted at local levels [20]. While the aforementioned studies have sought to measure the relationship between the stringency of containment policies and changes in health services, they tend to be limited in terms of geographic areas or in the types of health services covered, focusing largely on maternal and child health services.

In this paper, we investigate associations between the stringency of COVID-19 containment policies and disruptions in 31 health services in 10 low- middle- and high-income countries. We further extend this analysis by examining the relative impact of 11 individual containment or closure policies on health service disruptions. This study was undertaken as a part of the QuEST Network, a global partnership of researchers and policy makers conducting health systems research. Participating countries were selected based on prior collaborations. Colleagues from 10 countries with different income levels, health system types, severity of COVID and government responses to COVID joined the effort.

Methods

Data sources

Data on the volume of varying health services provided from January 2019 to December 2020 (24 months) were extracted from administrative sources and Routine Health Information Systems (RHIS) in Chile, Ethiopia, Ghana, Haiti, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Mexico, Nepal, South Africa, South Korea, and Thailand. In Ethiopia, Ghana, Haiti, Lao PDR, Nepal and South Africa, RHIS data were extracted from the DHIS2 platform. The DHIS2 platform is the world’s largest health management information system software used by more than 73 countries [21]. In Chile, Mexico, South Korea and Thailand, the data were obtained from various administrative health datasets including the health information system of the Ministry of Health of Chile and of the Mexican Institute for Social Security (IMSS), the South Korea National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) Health Facility Claims Database, and the National Health Database of the Ministry of Public Health of Thailand, respectively.

In Ghana, Haiti, Nepal, and South Korea the datasets included all health facilities in the country reporting to the DHIS2 [2]. In Ethiopia, the Tigray region was excluded due to the ongoing conflict and lack of reporting in late 2020. In Lao PDR and Thailand only visits from public sector facilities were available and in Mexico only the facilities that are run by IMSS. In Chile, certain indicators included only the public sector. In South Africa, we obtained data from the KwaZulu-Natal Province only and the dataset included all health facilities in that province.

We used a series of data cleaning and validation procedures in countries with disaggregated data (Chile, Ethiopia, Haiti, Laos, Nepal and South Africa). First we identified positive outliers (greater than 3.5 standard deviations from the mean trend) and set any outliers as missing [22]. We did not assess negative outliers since decreases in utilization were expected during the COVID-19 pandemic. For each indicator, we also excluded any health facility with poor reporting completeness (i.e., those that reported less than 15 out of 24 months). In the other four countries, data validation was performed by the data custodians. Further information on these country-specific datasets and cleaning methods were published previously [2].

Data on COVID-19 containment policies were obtained from the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker (OxCGRT) dataset [1]. Two additional COVID-19 government responses – declaration of a state of emergencies and implementation of curfews – were also collected in all ten countries from online news sources and were validated by local researchers. The number of new COVID-19 cases each month were obtained from the COVID-19 Data Repository of the Center for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE) at Johns Hopkins University [23]. Gross domestic product (GDP) per capita for each country was obtained from the World Bank World Development Indicators database [24].

Measures

Health service disruptions: relative service volumes

We obtained data on a total of 31 health services covering a broad range of health needs (Supplemental Table 1). Because not every service was measured in every country, we analyzed the health services according to five categories: (1) service use overall and injuries (e.g., total outpatient visits, total inpatient admissions, road traffic injuries), (2) reproductive, maternal, and newborn health (e.g., deliveries, antenatal and postnatal care visits), (3) child health services and vaccinations (e.g., sick child visits, measles vaccinations), (4) antiretroviral therapy (ART) and (5) chronic disease services (e.g., diabetes visits, cancer and tuberculosis screening) (Supplemental Table 1). Monthly service volumes were aggregated at the national level in each country. To capture the level of change in each health service during COVID months (April to December 2020), we calculated relative service volumes by dividing monthly service volumes during COVID by the average service volume pre-COVID. The pre-COVID period included January 2019 to March 2020. The resulting outcome of interest represents the monthly service provision relative to the average before the pandemic. A value of 1 on any given month during COVID would indicate that the same number of patients were seen that month compared to the average pre-COVID, while a relative service volume value of 0.1 would indicate that the numbers of patients seen that month is only 10% of that on average pre-COVID.

Independent variables

In the main analysis, we used the OxCGRT stringency index as the exposure variable [1]. The OxCGRT stringency index is a composite measure based on nine containment, closure and health system response indicators tracked by the OxCGRT and measured on a daily basis in countries. The nine containment policies are: school closures, workplace closures, public events cancellations, restrictions on gathering, public transport closures, stay-at-home requirements, restrictions on internal movement, restrictions on international travel, and public information campaigns. The index captures the stringency of governments’ responses to the COVID-19 pandemic and uses values ranging from 0 to 100, with 100 being the most stringent [1]. To provide an illustration of the meaning of different stringency index values, Table 1 describes the different policies in place on four specific days in four countries, and the resulting value of the stringency index at that time. In the main analysis, we used the mean stringency index at the national level for each month from April to December 2020. Other independent variables included the total number of new COVID-19 cases at the national level every month from April to December 2020 and the latest estimates of GDP per capita available from the World Bank.

Table 1 COVID-19 containment policies in place on four specific days in four countries and resulting OxCGRT stringency index values
Full size table

Statistical analysis

We used a multi-level (including variables at country and country-month level) linear regression model to estimate the association between the OxCGRT stringency index and health service disruptions across 10 countries.

We used variance inflation factors with a threshold of 4 to examine the presence of multicollinearity (correlation amongst the independent variables) [25]. The model building process commenced with a saturated model including both random intercepts at the country-level and a random-coefficient for stringency as well as interactions between fixed effects [26]. These nested models were compared using the likelihood ratio test, resulting in the final parsimonious model structure below:

$$Y_{it}=\beta_0+\beta_1\left({stringency}_{it}\right)+\beta_2\left({COVID19\;cases}_{it}\right)+\beta_3\left({GDP}_i\right)+\beta_4\left(service\;type\;2\right)+\beta_5(service\;type\;3)+\beta_6\left(service\;type\;4\right)+\beta_7\left(service\;type\;5\right)+\mu_i+\epsilon_{it}$$

Where \({Y}_{it}\) is relative service volume in country i during month t. Stringency is the mean stringency index for country i during month t. COVID-19 cases is the total number of new COVID-19 cases in country i during month t. GDPi is GDP per capita in country i. Service type 2 to 5 are the health service category dummies (service use overall and injuries, child health services, ART services, or chronic disease services, with the reference category being service type 1 (reproductive, maternal and newborn health services). \({\mu }_{i}\) is a country-level random intercept and \({\epsilon }_{it}\) is a normally distributed error term. Models also used robust standard errors. To facilitate the interpretation of model coefficients, the stringency index was rescaled to a factor of 10, and GDP per capita to a factor of 1000 (ie. these variables were multiplied by the relevant factors and this form of the variable was included in the model).

To assess the robustness of the effect of stringency on relative service volumes we repeated the analyses using other forms of the main exposure variable: 1) the median stringency index per month (instead of the mean) and 2) using the maximum stringency index observed in a month. These models were fitted using the same fixed and random effects structure as described above. The within-country correlation was estimated using adjusted and unadjusted intracluster correlation.

As a sub-analysis we assessed associations between 11 individual COVID-19 containment policies and the relative service volumes. We included the nine response indicators used in the OxCGRT stringency index and two additional indicators: presence of curfews and state of emergency in place. The nine response indicators from OxCGRT stringency index were recoded as binary variables for ease of interpretation (Supplemental Table 2). Each of the 11 containment policies were added separately to regression models with the same fixed and random effects structure as described above (excluding the stringency index).

Results

Our analysis included data from ten countries including three in Latin America and Caribbean, three in Sub-Saharan Africa, three in East Asia and the Pacific and one in South Asia (Table 2). GDP per capita ranged from $ USD 2,297 in Ethiopia to $ USD 42,251 in South Korea. The average number of new diagnosed COVID-19 cases per million population per month in 2020 varied widely from 0.48 in Lao PDR to more than 3,500 in Chile (Table 2). Chile had the highest average monthly stringency index during the study period (79.70), while Lao PDR had the lowest (44.53).

Table 2 Country characteristics and average disruptions in health services during COVID-19 in 2020
Full size table

Our final dataset included a total of 1,467 relative service volume observations estimated monthly for each health service from April to December 2020. Countries with the largest health service disruptions included Chile, Mexico, and South Africa. For example, in Chile, the number of consultations for chronic disease services from April to December 2020 was only 45% of that provided on average pre-COVID-19. Ethiopia and South Korea were among the least affected countries. Average monthly relative service volumes by categories of services during the COVID-19 period are provided in Table 2. Chronic disease care (including visits for hypertension and diabetes and cancer and tuberculosis screening) and child health services (e.g., visits for children with diarrhea or pneumonia) were among the most affected services. Reproductive, maternal, and newborn health services (e.g., delivery care and c-sections) were generally less affected. The magnitude of service disruptions estimated using an interrupted time series (ITS) analysis was described in a previous study [2].

The relationship between the stringency index and relative service volumes is shown in Fig. 1. Several health services were considerably lower than the average pre-COVID (where the blue line is below 100% in Fig. 1). The mean stringency index (shown as a red line in Fig. 1) was relatively constant from April to December 2020 in Chile, Mexico, and South Korea. In contrast, it varied considerably in the other countries, often starting with high stringency in April and May 2020 which was slowly reduced over time.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Trends in relative service volumes and the OxCGRT stringency index from April to December 2020. The post-COVID months of April (month 4) through December (month 12) 2020 are shown on the x-axes. The left y-axis is the relative service volume (%) and the right y-axis is the OxCGRT stringency index. The red line is the mean stringency index over these nine months. The navy dots represent the relative service volume (%) for individual health services each month (listed in Supplemental Table 1). The navy line is the mean relative service volume (%) per service type over time. The black line is a reference line for 100% relative service volume and 100% stringency index. CHL is Chile, ETH is Ethiopia, GHA is Ghana, HTI is Haiti, KOR is South Korea, KZN is KwaZulu-Natal Province, LAO is Lao People’s Democratic Republic, MEX is Mexico, NEP is Nepal and THA is Thailand

Full size image

Results from multi-level linear regression models are presented in Table 3. After adjusting for COVID cases per million, health service type and GDP per capita, a 10% increase in the mean stringency index was associated with a 3.3 percentage point (95% CI -3.9; -2.7) reduction in relative service volume. COVID-19 cases per million were not associated with relative service volumes. A higher GDP per capita was also associated with lower relative service volumes. We also found relatively high within-country correlation evidenced by a covariate-adjusted intracluster correlation coefficient (ICC) of 0.17 (0.07–0.34).

Table 3 Results from multi-level linear regression model for the association between the OxCGRT stringency index and relative service volumes
Full size table

In the adjusted model, two health service types (service use overall and injuries and child health services) were associated with significantly lower relative service volumes (worst disruptions) compared to reproductive and maternal services. Associations between the stringency index and relative service volumes was robust to alternate specifications including using the monthly median stringency index and the monthly maximum stringency index instead of the mean (see supplemental Tables 3 and 4).

Associations between each of the 11 individual COVID-19 containment or closure policies and relative service volumes were assessed by fitting separate multilevel regression models, all of which included a country random effect and the following independent variables: COVID-19 cases per million, health service type and GDP per capita. We found that each containment policy was negatively associated with relative service volumes. Coefficients ranged from a 4.2 percentage-points decline in relative service volumes for public transport closures to a 14.1 percentage-point decline for curfews. Curfews, restrictions on gatherings and presence of a national state of emergency had the largest coefficients (Fig. 2). These three policies were associated with a 10-percentage point or greater reduction in relative service volumes.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Results from multi-level effects linear regression models for the association between individual COVID-19 containment policies and relative service volumes. Associations between individual COVID-19 containment and closure policies were assessed. Each of the 11 containment policies were added separately to regression models with same fixed and random effects structure described. The model included COVID-19 cases as the COVID-19 cases per million monthly in each country, service type categories for service volume (1) reproductive, maternal, or newborn, (2) service use overall and injuries, (3) child health services, (4) antiretroviral therapy and (5) chronic diseases), GDP as GDP per capita, rescaled to a factor of 1000. The public information campaigns policy, collected by OxCGRT, was excluded as the policy was always in place in all countries over the study period

Full size image

Discussion

In this paper, we used RHIS and administrative data to estimate the associations between the stringency of COVID-19 containment policies and health service disruptions in 10 countries in 2020. We found that a 10% increase in the mean stringency index was associated with a 3.3 percentage-point reduction in relative service volumes after adjusting for COVID caseload, health service type and country GDP. We also found that nearly all individual containment policies were also associated with significantly lower essential health service use, with curfews and presence of a state of emergency being associated with the greatest disruption in service utilization. In contrast, COVID-19 cases were not associated with health service use. Although the overall effect size we find is small (3.3 percentage-point reduction with 10% increase in stringency), this finding has policy relevance and demonstrates a lack of health system resilience. Any reduction in essential health service use could have important consequences on health, particularly in lower income countries where health care utilization had low baseline levels. In future pandemics, policy makers must ensure that the population can continue accessing essential care while policies are in place to contain outbreaks.

Our study highlights that utilization of essential health services during a pandemic is affected by the types of policies implemented by governments to respond to the crisis. There are many mechanisms by which COVID-19 containment and closure policies could affect people’s willingness or ability to seek health services. Although essential services were permitted during stay-at-home orders, people might still be deterred from seeking care if restrictions were rigidly enforced. In South Africa, people reported fearing being arrested or fined as a reason for not visiting healthcare facilities in April 2020 [28]. In Nepal, strict lockdowns were enforced by the police and citizens were punished if they defied restrictions [29]. In addition, the majority of individuals in the countries studied rely on public transport systems. In 2020, public transports were either fully interrupted, passenger capacity was limited, or they were restricted to short timeframes for transport of essential workers. In some countries, the cost of public transport also increased in 2020 [30,31,32]. Stringent restrictions might also increase people’s fear of infection in general and when visiting health facilities [19, 33, 34]. Furthermore, the economic effects of COVID lockdowns were distributed inequitably [11, 35, 36]. These lockdowns and containment policies had significant economic impacts on many people, especially those working in informal sectors [37]. Periods of reduced or no income may be associated with lower health care seeking in countries with high out-of-pocket costs. Nonetheless, restrictions may have also led to a reduced need for certain health services including fewer road traffic injuries from reduced mobility and fewer communicable diseases from social distancing, handwashing and mask wearing.

It is important to note that COVID caseloads during this period were not associated with health service disruptions. A study in 18 low- and middle-income countries also found no significant relationship between COVID-19-related deaths and the magnitude of change in any health service [16]. During the first wave of the pandemic, many countries put in place stringent restrictions even when caseloads were low as understandably, much was still unknown about COVID-19 and its effects [37]. For example, in Lao PDR, the worst health service disruptions took place in April 2020, when less than 20 total COVID-19 cases had been recorded in the country.

It is apparent that COVID-19 containment policies have had important indirect effects beyond infection control. COVID-19 restrictions had deleterious economic effects on people globally, especially women [35, 36]. Reports of violence against women and children also increased during COVID-19 lockdowns [38, 39]. Studies have also found that lockdowns may have worsened chronic disease and mental health outcomes. In Nepal, worsening health outcomes among older adults with pre-existing conditions have been reported in part due to significant difficulties in obtaining medications during lockdowns [40]. In Chile, important indirect effects on cardiovascular mortality were reported and were found to be inequitably distributed between women and men [41]. In a study across 15 countries, more stringent COVID containment policies were associated with more psychological distress [42]. COVID-19 restrictions have also resulted in a loss of quality of life. A study using online quality of life surveys estimated that 3,259 million quality-adjusted life-years have been lost globally due to COVID restrictions [43].

Our study shows that the stringency of containment policies was also linked to a reduction in health service utilization. Our findings are consistent with those of other studies that have assessed lockdowns and health service utilization [10, 15]. To our knowledge, only two other multi-country studies have looked at associations between the stringency of COVID-19 restrictions and health service disruptions [14, 16]. Our study contributes to this literature and expands the range of health services and countries studied thus far. We included a broad range of health services and data from 10 countries with varying income levels, COVID caseloads and types of pandemic response.

Nonetheless, our study has limitations. Although a range of countries were included, the association between the stringency of COVID containment policies and service volumes might not be generalizable to all countries or contexts. Second, the associations we describe cannot be interpreted as causal. Models were adjusted for GDP per capita, monthly number of new COVID-19 cases, and type of health service. Nonetheless, it is possible that other variables ( e.g., quality of governance or population age or health needs) may confound the association between restrictions and health services. Third, the administrative datasets used in Chile, Mexico, South Korea and Thailand may differ from the DHIS2 data used in the other six countries, However, co-authors ensured that indicator definitions were comparable across countries. In addition, in some countries, routine health data excluded private facilities, telemedicine visits or some regions in the country [2]. It is also possible that the reporting of routine health data was affected by the pandemic, but rigorous cleaning and verification methods were used and only facilities continuously reporting throughout the study period were included [2]. In addition, COVID cases depend on countries’ surveillance systems and testing capacities and may have been under-counted due to limited testing capacity in the early months of the pandemic, which might bias our results. Although the containment policy tracking followed rigorous validation methods, it is possible that the policies and policy dates could be misclassified [1]. Furthermore, while the association between the stringency of containment policies and disruptions in specific health types (e.g., antiretroviral therapy) may be of interest, our study did not have sufficient power to conduct these stratified analyses by service type. Finally, our study includes data until December 2020. Associations between the stringency of policies and health service utilization has likely evolved in later months of the pandemic.

Our study contributes to understanding the effect of pandemic responses on health service utilization [14, 16]. Although COVID containment policies were crucial to reducing COVID-19 mortality in many contexts, it is important to consider the indirect effects of these restrictions. These indirect effects will likely have long-term population health consequences, as many of the countries studied were already struggling to meet healthcare needs before the pandemic. Containment policies or closures might be necessary to reduce infection, but they should be combined with other policies to promote essential health service utilization. Policies to promote essential health services during times of crisis should be expansive and extend beyond just maternal and child health [44]. Several service adaptations to maintain essential non-COVID healthcare have been implemented in the studied countries and have included the use of telemedicine, community outreach and innovations for medicine delivery. In South Africa, the central Chronic Medicines Dispensing and Distribution program was expanded for community delivery of drugs for chronic diseases [45]. Similarly, in Thailand, service adaptions included telemedicine, shipping of medicine for chronic disease patients and home delivery of medicine by village health volunteers [46,47,48]. In Chile, an online platform was developed by the Ministry of Health to provide mental health care [49]. In Ethiopia, adaptations to RMNCH services included an increase in phone based follow-up care as well as provision of multiple months of contraceptives at a single visit [50]. Multi-sectoral collaborations and private partnerships were also designed to support the Ethiopian health system [51]. Multi-month dispensing of antiretroviral therapy (ART) guidelines were also distributed by The United States President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) in many countries [52]. In Nepal, various hospitals and the Nepal Medical Association initiated telemedicine services and deferred elective surgeries and procedures so that resources could be reallocated to other services [53]. The Ministry of Health in Mexico launched home visits to detect COVID-19 cases while also delivering health promotion and prevention activities, including continuity of care for patients with uncontrolled chronic diseases [54]. These adaptations should be standardized and expanded in times of crisis while ensuring quality of care when services are adapted.

Conclusion

Recently, the WHO revealed that an estimated 14.9 million excess deaths occurred globally between January 2020 and December 2021 of which only 5.42 million were reported COVID deaths, calling for more resilient health systems globally [55]. Health service disruptions likely contributed to this increase in indirect mortality. Plans for pandemic response should consider health system resilience in order to minimize the indirect health consequences of pandemics. As policy makers weigh re-implementing containment policies to reduce infection spread during future waves of COVID or future pandemics, it is important to take these indirect effects into consideration. This study reiterates the importance of resilience in health systems and the need for greater adaptive and transformative capacity, which has the potential to lessen the adverse impact of restrictions imposed during future crises [56].

Availability of data and materials

The data used in Chile are publicly available from https://deis.minsal.cl/. The data Thailand are publicly available from the Ministry of Public Health: http://hdcservice.moph.go.th/. The data from the Mexican Institute for Social Security were deposited in a repository [57]. In all other countries, the data are restricted, and permissions to access the data must be obtained from respective Ministries of Health. Data on containment and closure policies are publicly available from the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker (OxCGRT) repository: https://github.com/OxCGRT/covid-policy-tracker . All statistical codes used for the analysis are publicly available from a GitHub repository: https://github.com/catherine-arsenault/HS-performance-during-covid-do-files.

References

  1. Hale T, Angrist N, Goldszmidt R, et al. A global panel database of pandemic policies (Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker). Nat Hum Behav. 2021;5:529–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Arsenault C, Gage A, Kim MK, et al. COVID-19 and resilience of healthcare systems in ten countries. Nat Med. 2022;28:1314–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Moynihan, R, Sanders, S, Michaleff, ZA, et al. Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on utilisation of healthcare services: a systematic review. BMJ Open 2021;11. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045343.

  4. Hategeka C, Carter SE, Chenge FM, et al. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and response on the utilisation of health services in public facilities during the first wave in Kinshasa, the Democratic Republic of the Congo. BMJ Glob Health 2021;6. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34315776.

  5. Doubova SV, Leslie HH, Kruk ME, Perez-Cuevas R, Arsenault C. Disruption in essential health services in Mexico during COVID-19: an interrupted time series analysis of health information system data. BMJ Glob Health;6. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2021-006204.

  6. Burt JF, Ouma J, Lubyayi L, et al. Indirect effects of COVID-19 on maternal, neonatal, child, sexual and reproductive health services in Kampala, Uganda. BMJ Glob Health 2021;6. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2021-006102.

  7. Aranda Z, Binde T, Tashman K, et al. Disruptions in maternal health service use during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020: experiences from 37 health facilities in low-income and middle-income countries. BMJ Glob Health. 2022;7:e007247.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kc A, Gurung R, Kinney MV, et al. Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic response on intrapartum care, stillbirth, and neonatal mortality outcomes in Nepal: a prospective observational study. Lancet Glob Health. 2020;8:e1273–81.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Shapira G, Ahmed T, Drouard SHP, et al. Disruptions in maternal and child health service utilization during COVID-19: analysis from eight sub-Saharan African countries. Health Policy Plan. 2021;36:1140–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Dorward J, Khubone T, Gate K, et al. The impact of the COVID-19 lockdown on HIV care in 65 South African primary care clinics: an interrupted time series analysis. Lancet HIV. 2021;8:e158–65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Burger R, Day C, Deghaye N, et al. Examining the unintended consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on public sector health facility visits: The first 150 days. 2020. https://cramsurvey.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/16.-Examining-the-unintended-consequences-of-the-COVID-19-pandemic-on-public-sector-health-facility-visits-The-first-150-days-2.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Wood SN, Karp C, OlaOlorun F, et al. Need for and use of contraception by women before and during COVID-19 in four sub-Saharan African geographies: results from population-based national or regional cohort surveys. Lancet Glob Health. 2021;9:e793-801.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Roy CM, Bollman EB, Carson LM, Northrop AJ, Jackson EF, Moresky RT. Assessing the indirect effects of COVID-19 on healthcare delivery, utilization and health outcomes: a scoping review. Eur J Public Health. 2021;31:634–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Amouzou A, Maïga A, Faye CM, et al. Health service utilisation during the COVID-19 pandemic in sub-Saharan Africa in 2020: a multicountry empirical assessment with a focus on maternal, newborn and child health services. BMJ Glob Health. 2022;7:e008069.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Siedner MJ, Kraemer JD, Meyer MJ, et al. Access to primary healthcare during lockdown measures for COVID-19 in rural South Africa: an interrupted time series analysis. BMJ Open. 2020;10:e043763.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ahmed T, Roberton T, Monitoring of Essential Health Services Team, et al. Indirect Effects on Maternal and Child Mortality from the COVID-19 Pandemic: Evidence from Disruptions in Healthcare Utilization in 18 Low- and Middle-Income Countries. 2021. published online Sept 9. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3916767.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Saqib MAN, Siddiqui S, Qasim M, et al. Effect of COVID-19 lockdown on patients with chronic diseases. Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2020;14:1621–3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Topriceanu C-C, Wong A, Moon JC, et al. Evaluating access to health and care services during lockdown by the COVID-19 survey in five UK national longitudinal studies. BMJ Open. 2021;11:e045813.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Singh DR, Sunuwar DR, Shah SK, et al. Impact of COVID-19 on health services utilization in Province-2 of Nepal: a qualitative study among community members and stakeholders. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21:174.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Kapoor NR, Aryal A, Mehata S, et al. Effect of lifting COVID-19 restrictions on utilisation of primary care services in Nepal: a difference-in-differences analysis. BMJ Open. 2022;12:e061849. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-061849.

  21. dhis2. https://dhis2.org/.

  22. Module 2: Desk review of data quality. World Health Organization, 2017 https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/259225.

  23. Dong E, Du H, Gardner L. An interactive web-based dashboard to track COVID-19 in real time. Lancet Infect Dis. 2020;20:P533-534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. The World Bank Data. 2020. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD.

  25. James G, Witten D, Hastie T, Tibshirani R. An introduction to statistical learning. New York: Springer; 2013.

  26. Verbeke G, Molenberghs G. Linear Mixed Models for Longitudinal Data. 1st ed. NY: Springer New York; 2000. http://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/b98969.

    Google Scholar 

  27. World Bank Country and Lending Groups – World Bank Data Help Desk. https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-world-bank-country-and-lending-groups.

  28. Behavioural and health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic in South Africa. Department of Statistics South Africa, 2020. https://www.statssa.gov.za/publications/Report-00-80-02/Report-00-80-022020.pdf.

  29. Nepal Police crack down on 749 Kathmandu residents for violating Covid-19 lockdown. India Today. 2020; published online March 30. https://www.indiatoday.in/world/story/nepal-police-crackdown-on-749-kathmandu-residents-for-violating-covid-19-lockdown-1661343-2020-03-30.

  30. Barbieri DM, Lou B, Passavanti M, et al. Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on mobility in ten countries and associated perceived risk for all transport modes. PLoS One. 2021;16:e0245886.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Chilot D, Woldeamanuel Y, Manyazewal T. Real-Time Impact of COVID-19 on Clinical Care and Treatment of Patients with Tuberculosis: A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Study in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Ann Glob Health; 2021;87:109.

  32. Bekele C, Bekele D, Hunegnaw BM, et al. Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Utilization of Facility-Based Essential Maternal and Child Health Services in North Shewa Zone, Ethiopia. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.01.10.22268794. published online Jan 11.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  33. Yadav UN, Yadav OP, Singh DR, et al. Perceived fear of COVID-19 and its associated factors among Nepalese older adults in eastern Nepal: a cross-sectional study. PLoS One. 2021;16:e0254825.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Workicho A, Kershaw MJ, Berhanu L, Kebede M, Kennedy E. Essential Health and Nutrition Service Provision during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Lessons from Select Ethiopian Woredas. Curr Dev Nutr. 2021;5:nzab024.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Mahmud M, Riley E. Household response to an extreme shock: Evidence on the immediate impact of the Covid-19 lockdown on economic outcomes and well-being in rural Uganda. World Dev. 2021;140:105318.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. O’Donnell M, Bourgault S, McDougal L, Dehingia N, Cheung WW, Raj A. The Impacts of COVID-19 on Women’s Social and Economic Outcomes: An Updated Review of the Evidence. Center for Global Development, Center on Gender Equity and Health. https://www.cgdev.org/sites/default/files/impacts-covid-19-womens-social-and-economic-outcomes-updated-review-evidence.pdf.

  37. Cash R, Patel V. Has COVID-19 subverted global health? Lancet. 2020;395:1687–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Wood SN, Yirgu R, Wondimagegnehu A, et al. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on intimate partner violence during pregnancy: evidence from a multimethods study of recently pregnant women in Ethiopia. BMJ Open. 2022;12:e055790.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. A study on the impact of COVID-19 on women and girls in Ethiopia. Addis Ababa, Ethiopia: CARE Ethiopia, 2021. https://reliefweb.int/report/ethiopia/study-impact-covid-19-women-and-girls-ethiopia.

  40. Ghimire S, Shrestha A, Yadav UN, et al. Older adults with pre-existing noncommunicable conditions and their healthcare access amid COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study in eastern Nepal. BMJ Open. 2022;12:e056342.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Chang S-W, Zitko P, Passi-Solar Á, Danaei G, Margozzini P. Changes in cardiovascular mortality in Chile during the COVID-19 pandemic. Heart 2022; published online Feb 1. https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2021-320082.

  42. Aknin LB, Andretti B, Goldszmidt R, et al. Policy stringency and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal analysis of data from 15 countries. Lancet Public Health. 2022;7:e417–26.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Fink G, Tediosi F, Felder S. Burden of Covid-19 restrictions: National, regional and global estimates. eClinicalMedicine. 2022;45:101305.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Gurley N, Ebeling E, Bennett A, et al. National policy responses to maintain essential health services during the COVID-19 pandemic. Bull World Health Organ. 2022;100:168–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Liu L, Christie S, Munsamy M, et al. Expansion of a national differentiated service delivery model to support people living with HIV and other chronic conditions in South Africa: a descriptive analysis. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21:463.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Songsermpong S, Bunluesin S, Khomgongsuwan P, et al. Innovations to Sustain Non-Communicable Disease Services in the Context of COVID-19: Report from Pakkred District, Nonthaburi Province, Thailand. Global heart 2021;16.https://doi.org/10.5334/gh.1003.

  47. Krassanairawiwong T, Suvannit C, Pongpirul K, Tungsanga K. Roles of subdistrict health office personnel and village health volunteers in Thailand during the COVID-19 pandemic. BMJ Case Rep. 2021;14:e244765.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Chattranukulchai P, Thongtang N, Ophascharoensuk V, et al. An Implementation Framework for Telemedicine to Address Noncommunicable Diseases in Thailand. Asia Pac J Public Health. 2021;33:968–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Healthy Mind - Gob.cl. Gobierno de Chile. https://www.gob.cl/saludablemente/.

  50. RMNCAYH-N Services During COVID-19: A spotlight on Ethiopia’s policy responses to maintain and adapt essential health services. Seattle, WA: PATH, 2021 https://path.azureedge.net/media/documents/Ethiopia_RMNCH_Deep_Dive_brief.pdf.

  51. Lanyero B, Edea ZA, Musa EO, et al. Readiness and early response to COVID-19: achievements, challenges and lessons learnt in Ethiopia. BMJ Glob Health. 2021;6:e005581.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Bailey LE, Siberry GK, Agaba P, Douglas M, Clinkscales JR, Godfrey C. The impact of COVID-19 on multi-month dispensing (MMD) policies for antiretroviral therapy (ART) and MMD uptake in 21 PEPFAR-supported countries: a multi-country analysis. J Int AIDS Soc. 2021;24:e25794.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Telemedicine service effective in remote areas. Khabarhub. 2022; published online March 16. https://english.khabarhub.com/2022/16/241824/.

  54. Estrategia de atención primaria en salud para covid-19. Secretaría de Salud del Gobierno de México, 2020. https://coronavirus.gob.mx/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/APS_COVID_v17_08_2020.pdf.

  55. Global excess deaths associated with COVID-19, January 2020 - December 2021. World Health Organization, 2022. https://www.who.int/data/stories/global-excess-deaths-associated-with-covid-19-january-2020-december-2021.

  56. Blanchet K, Nam SL, Ramalingam B, Pozo-Martin F. Governance and Capacity to Manage Resilience of Health Systems: Towards a New Conceptual Framework. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2017;6:431–5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Arsenault C. "Service delivery at IMSS during the COVID-19 pandemic".  Harvard Dataverse; 2021;1. https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/XSHQYB.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank all members of the ICODA REHCORD driver project (assessing the resilience of health systems during COVID using routine data) and members of the QuEST network that supported the overall project.

Funding

This work is part of the Grand Challenges ICODA pilot initiative, delivered by Health Data Research UK and funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Minderoo Foundation (reference number INV-017293). We also acknowledge funding from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (grant INV-005254).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Tarylee Reddy and Neena R. Kapoor contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Biostatistics Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Durban, South Africa

    Tarylee Reddy

  2. School of Mathematics, Statistics and Computer Science, University of KwaZulu Natal, Durban, South Africa

    Tarylee Reddy

  3. Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, USA

    Neena R. Kapoor & Margaret E. Kruk

  4. World Health Organization, Vientiane, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Vientiane, Laos

    Shogo Kubota & Daisuke Asai

  5. Epidemiology and Health Services Research Unit CMN Siglo XXI, Mexican Institute of Social Security, Mexico City, Mexico

    Svetlana V Doubova

  6. School of Public Health, College of Health Sciences, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

    Damen Haile Mariam, Wondimu Ayele, Anagaw Derseh Mebratie & Adiam Nega

  7. Studies and Planning Unit, Ministry of Public Health and Population, Port-Au-Prince, Haiti

    Roody Thermidor

  8. Public Health Department, Faculty of Medicine, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile

    Jaime C. Sapag, Paula Bedregal, Álvaro Passi-Solar & Paula Margozzini

  9. Caribbean Institute for Health Research, University of West Indies, Kingston, Jamaica

    Georgiana Gordon-Strachan

  10. Office of the Member of Federal Parliament Gagan Kumar Thapa, Kathmandu, Nepal

    Mahesh Dulal

  11. School of Public Health, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana

    Dominic Dormenyo Gadeka & John Koku Awoonor-Williams

  12. Ministry of Health, Koshi Province, Biratnagar, Nepal

    Suresh Mehata

  13. Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand

    Borwornsom Leerapan, Thanitsara Rittiphairoj & Phanuwich Kaewkamjornchai

  14. Department of Global Health, The George Washington University Milken Institute School of Public Health, Washington, USA

    Catherine Arsenault

Authors
  1. Tarylee Reddy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Neena R. Kapoor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shogo Kubota
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Svetlana V Doubova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Daisuke Asai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Damen Haile Mariam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Wondimu Ayele
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Anagaw Derseh Mebratie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Roody Thermidor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Jaime C. Sapag
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Paula Bedregal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Álvaro Passi-Solar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Georgiana Gordon-Strachan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Mahesh Dulal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Dominic Dormenyo Gadeka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Suresh Mehata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Paula Margozzini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Borwornsom Leerapan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Thanitsara Rittiphairoj
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  20. Phanuwich Kaewkamjornchai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  21. Adiam Nega
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  22. John Koku Awoonor-Williams
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  23. Margaret E. Kruk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  24. Catherine Arsenault
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

CA, TR and NRK designed the study. SD, DA, and PK extracted and compiled health service data. NRK, TR and CA led the data analysis. NRK, TR and CA, wrote the first draft and all other co-authors contributed to the interpretation of findings and read, improved, and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Catherine Arsenault.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study did not involve human subjects and thus did not require approval or informed consent. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health determined that this study is not human subjects research and was exempted from a full review. All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations in the declaration of Helsinki. Permissions to access administrative and routine health data were obtained from: The Ministry of Health of Ethiopia, Ghana Health Services, the Ministry of Public Health and Population of Haiti, the Ministry of Health of Lao People’s Democratic Republic, the Mexican Institute for Social Security, the Ministry of Health and Population of Nepal, South Korea’s National Health Insurance Service, and the South African National Department of Health.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1: Supplemental Table 1.

Health services by service type category in 10 countries. Supplemental Table 2. Definition of containment policies and dichotomous recoding. Supplemental Table 3. Results from multi-level linear regression model for the association between the OxCGRT stringency index and relative service volumes (median stringency index). Supplemental Table 4. Results from multi-level linear regression model for the association between the OxCGRT stringency index and relative service volumes (max stringency index).

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Reddy, T., Kapoor, N.R., Kubota, S. et al. Associations between the stringency of COVID-19 containment policies and health service disruptions in 10 countries. BMC Health Serv Res 23, 363 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-023-09363-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-023-09363-1

Keywords

BMC Health Services Research

ISSN: 1472-6963

Contact us