The Impact of United Kingdom and Malaysia's Inherent Health Systems on Their COVID-19 Responses: A Comparison of Containment Strategies.

IF 1.7 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH World Medical & Health Policy Pub Date : 2021-09-01 Epub Date: 2021-05-04 DOI:10.1002/wmh3.412
Shereen Allaham, Isabel-Cathérine Demel, Intesar Nur, Faizul Nizam Abu Salim, Logan Manikam
{"title":"The Impact of United Kingdom and Malaysia's Inherent Health Systems on Their COVID-19 Responses: A Comparison of Containment Strategies.","authors":"Shereen Allaham,&nbsp;Isabel-Cathérine Demel,&nbsp;Intesar Nur,&nbsp;Faizul Nizam Abu Salim,&nbsp;Logan Manikam","doi":"10.1002/wmh3.412","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In March 2020, the outbreak of COVID-19 was officially declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization. Given the novelty of the virus, and hence, lack of official guidance on effective containment strategies, individual countries opted for different containment approaches ranging from herd immunity to strict lockdown. The opposing strategies followed by the United Kingdom and its former colony, Malaysia, stand exemplary for this. Real-time polymerase chain reaction was implemented for testing in both counties. Malaysia acted with strict quarantining rules and infection surveillance. The United Kingdom followed an initially lenient, herd-immunity approach with strict lockdown only enforced weeks later. Although based on the same health-care structure historically, Malaysia developed a more unified health system compared with the United Kingdom. We suggest that this more centralized structure could be one possible explanation for why Malaysia was able to react in a more timely and efficient manner, despite its closer geographic proximity to China. We further explore how the differences in testing and quarantining strategy, as well as political situation and societal compliance could account for the discrepancy in the United Kingdom's versus Malaysia's relative success of COVID-19 containment.</p>","PeriodicalId":44943,"journal":{"name":"World Medical & Health Policy","volume":"13 3","pages":"571-580"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/wmh3.412","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Medical & Health Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wmh3.412","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/5/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

In March 2020, the outbreak of COVID-19 was officially declared a global pandemic by the World Health Organization. Given the novelty of the virus, and hence, lack of official guidance on effective containment strategies, individual countries opted for different containment approaches ranging from herd immunity to strict lockdown. The opposing strategies followed by the United Kingdom and its former colony, Malaysia, stand exemplary for this. Real-time polymerase chain reaction was implemented for testing in both counties. Malaysia acted with strict quarantining rules and infection surveillance. The United Kingdom followed an initially lenient, herd-immunity approach with strict lockdown only enforced weeks later. Although based on the same health-care structure historically, Malaysia developed a more unified health system compared with the United Kingdom. We suggest that this more centralized structure could be one possible explanation for why Malaysia was able to react in a more timely and efficient manner, despite its closer geographic proximity to China. We further explore how the differences in testing and quarantining strategy, as well as political situation and societal compliance could account for the discrepancy in the United Kingdom's versus Malaysia's relative success of COVID-19 containment.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
英国和马来西亚固有的卫生系统对其COVID-19应对的影响:遏制策略的比较。
2020年3月,世界卫生组织正式宣布新冠肺炎疫情为全球大流行。鉴于该病毒的新颖性,以及缺乏关于有效遏制战略的官方指导,各国选择了不同的遏制方法,从群体免疫到严格封锁。联合王国和它的前殖民地马来西亚所采取的相反战略就是这方面的典范。两县采用实时聚合酶链反应进行检测。马来西亚采取了严格的隔离规定和感染监测措施。英国最初采取了宽松的群体免疫方法,几周后才实施严格的封锁。虽然历史上基于相同的卫生保健结构,但与联合王国相比,马来西亚制定了更统一的卫生系统。我们认为,这种更集中的结构可能是马来西亚能够更及时、更有效地做出反应的一个可能解释,尽管它在地理上与中国更接近。我们进一步探讨了检测和隔离策略的差异,以及政治局势和社会合规的差异,如何解释英国与马来西亚在COVID-19控制方面相对成功的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
World Medical & Health Policy
World Medical & Health Policy PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
7.10
自引率
7.30%
发文量
65
期刊最新文献
Exploring critical factors in referral systems at different health‐care levels Mapping out a direction: India's G20 presidency propels global promotion of traditional medicine Rethinking and advancing the movement of resistance, activism, and advocacy in health in four central arenas of the Middle East Region “Patriarchy permeating health policymaking”: Influence of gender on involvement in health policymaking from nurse leaders' perspective Breast cancer screening and early detection programs in Iran: A health policy analysis and recommendations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1