Denmark, the United States and Canada: Before, during and post vaccination rollout

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Health Policy and Technology Pub Date : 2024-03-01 DOI:10.1016/j.hlpt.2023.100791
Michelle Falkenbach , Charley E. Willison , Phillip M. Singer
{"title":"Denmark, the United States and Canada: Before, during and post vaccination rollout","authors":"Michelle Falkenbach ,&nbsp;Charley E. Willison ,&nbsp;Phillip M. Singer","doi":"10.1016/j.hlpt.2023.100791","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>We conduct a rapid review of the post-COVID-19 vaccination efforts undertaken by Denmark, the United States, and Canada. The main areas of focus are threefold: 1) To analyze the timeline of the rollout and access/barriers to vaccinations considering the changing dynamics of COVID-19 and the launch of new generation booster-vaccines across the case countries. 2) To examine sociopolitical factors related to this juxtaposition between lower booster acceptance, despite higher rates of initial vaccine series, in each of the three cases. 3) To determine how each country is moving forward with their ongoing COVID-19 strategies for long-term mitigation planning.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We followed a Most Similar Systems Design (MSSD) framework to select our cases. We analyze country responses amongst high-income, OECD countries, who shared Western or liberal Democracy, with a formal framework of rule of law, presence of a legal authority and the independence of the judiciary, but differ in their rollout and uptake of the vaccine booster.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Despite variation in booster uptake, all three countries’ COVID-19 mitigation responses became more similar over time, and each country experienced lower than expected booster uptake.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Decline in booster doses across each country was related to broad declines in concern about the virus in each location. However, cases with higher uptake of the initial series and use of NPIs, in Denmark and Canada, continue to fare better in morbidity and mortality from COVID-19, despite dwindling booster uptake.</p></div><div><h3>Public Interest Summary</h3><p>This study looks at how three high income western democracies (Denmark, the United States and Canada) handled the COVID-19 pandemic and booster vaccinations. We briefly look at the initial outbreak of the pandemic, contextualize the initial (pre-booster) vaccination uptake and then assess the booster vaccine uptake. We find that although the countries differ in their approach during the initial stages of COVID-19 and vaccination policy, they all share similarly low booster vaccine uptake. Yet, even with a similarly low booster uptake, each of the countries continue to exhibit differences in morbidity, mortality and disparities associated with COVID-19. The implications of this research are clear – providing access to vaccinations, boosters, testing, and treatment are essential in combating inequalities in COVID-19 outcomes. Overlaying these implications is the importance of a continuously updated national strategy for future pandemics is important.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48672,"journal":{"name":"Health Policy and Technology","volume":"13 1","pages":"Article 100791"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211883723000679/pdfft?md5=e57e03445fce488f5e13a1638ebd9777&pid=1-s2.0-S2211883723000679-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Policy and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211883723000679","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

We conduct a rapid review of the post-COVID-19 vaccination efforts undertaken by Denmark, the United States, and Canada. The main areas of focus are threefold: 1) To analyze the timeline of the rollout and access/barriers to vaccinations considering the changing dynamics of COVID-19 and the launch of new generation booster-vaccines across the case countries. 2) To examine sociopolitical factors related to this juxtaposition between lower booster acceptance, despite higher rates of initial vaccine series, in each of the three cases. 3) To determine how each country is moving forward with their ongoing COVID-19 strategies for long-term mitigation planning.

Methods

We followed a Most Similar Systems Design (MSSD) framework to select our cases. We analyze country responses amongst high-income, OECD countries, who shared Western or liberal Democracy, with a formal framework of rule of law, presence of a legal authority and the independence of the judiciary, but differ in their rollout and uptake of the vaccine booster.

Results

Despite variation in booster uptake, all three countries’ COVID-19 mitigation responses became more similar over time, and each country experienced lower than expected booster uptake.

Conclusions

Decline in booster doses across each country was related to broad declines in concern about the virus in each location. However, cases with higher uptake of the initial series and use of NPIs, in Denmark and Canada, continue to fare better in morbidity and mortality from COVID-19, despite dwindling booster uptake.

Public Interest Summary

This study looks at how three high income western democracies (Denmark, the United States and Canada) handled the COVID-19 pandemic and booster vaccinations. We briefly look at the initial outbreak of the pandemic, contextualize the initial (pre-booster) vaccination uptake and then assess the booster vaccine uptake. We find that although the countries differ in their approach during the initial stages of COVID-19 and vaccination policy, they all share similarly low booster vaccine uptake. Yet, even with a similarly low booster uptake, each of the countries continue to exhibit differences in morbidity, mortality and disparities associated with COVID-19. The implications of this research are clear – providing access to vaccinations, boosters, testing, and treatment are essential in combating inequalities in COVID-19 outcomes. Overlaying these implications is the importance of a continuously updated national strategy for future pandemics is important.

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
丹麦、美国和加拿大:在接种疫苗之前、期间和之后
目标我们对丹麦、美国和加拿大在 COVID-19 后开展的疫苗接种工作进行了快速回顾。主要关注点有三个方面:1)考虑到 COVID-19 和新一代加强免疫疫苗在案例国家中的动态变化,分析疫苗接种的推广时间表和接种途径/障碍。2) 在这三个案例中的每一个案例中,尽管初次接种疫苗的比例较高,但接受加强剂疫苗的比例较低,研究与这一并列关系相关的社会政治因素。3) 确定每个国家如何推进其正在实施的 COVID-19 战略,以进行长期缓解规划。我们分析了经合组织(OECD)高收入国家的应对措施,这些国家共享西方或自由民主制度,拥有正式的法治框架、法律机构和司法独立,但在疫苗强化剂的推广和使用方面存在差异。结果尽管加强剂接种率存在差异,但随着时间的推移,所有三个国家的 COVID-19 缓解反应都变得更加相似,而且每个国家的加强剂接种率都低于预期。然而,在丹麦和加拿大,尽管加强免疫接种率下降,但在 COVID-19 的发病率和死亡率方面,初次接种率较高且使用 NPIs 较多的病例仍然表现较好。我们简要回顾了大流行病最初爆发的情况,介绍了最初(加强接种前)疫苗接种的背景,然后评估了加强接种的情况。我们发现,尽管各国在 COVID-19 最初阶段的方法和疫苗接种政策有所不同,但它们的加强免疫接种率都同样较低。然而,即使强化免疫接种率同样低,各国在 COVID-19 相关的发病率、死亡率和差异方面仍然存在差异。这项研究的意义显而易见--提供疫苗接种、加强剂、检测和治疗服务对于消除 COVID-19 结果的不平等至关重要。与这些影响相辅相成的是,针对未来流行病不断更新国家战略的重要性。
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
Health Policy and Technology
Health Policy and Technology Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
9.20
自引率
3.30%
发文量
78
审稿时长
88 days
期刊介绍: Health Policy and Technology (HPT), is the official journal of the Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine (FPM), a cross-disciplinary journal, which focuses on past, present and future health policy and the role of technology in clinical and non-clinical national and international health environments. HPT provides a further excellent way for the FPM to continue to make important national and international contributions to development of policy and practice within medicine and related disciplines. The aim of HPT is to publish relevant, timely and accessible articles and commentaries to support policy-makers, health professionals, health technology providers, patient groups and academia interested in health policy and technology. Topics covered by HPT will include: - Health technology, including drug discovery, diagnostics, medicines, devices, therapeutic delivery and eHealth systems - Cross-national comparisons on health policy using evidence-based approaches - National studies on health policy to determine the outcomes of technology-driven initiatives - Cross-border eHealth including health tourism - The digital divide in mobility, access and affordability of healthcare - Health technology assessment (HTA) methods and tools for evaluating the effectiveness of clinical and non-clinical health technologies - Health and eHealth indicators and benchmarks (measure/metrics) for understanding the adoption and diffusion of health technologies - Health and eHealth models and frameworks to support policy-makers and other stakeholders in decision-making - Stakeholder engagement with health technologies (clinical and patient/citizen buy-in) - Regulation and health economics
期刊最新文献
Challenges of shared decision-making in virtual care: Whom should we care for, and how? Individual factors that affect laypeople's understanding of definitions of medical jargon An insight into the implementation, utilization, and evaluation of telemedicine e-consultation services in Egypt Multiple criteria qualitative value-based pricing framework “MARIE” for new drugs Assessing contributing and mediating factors of telemedicine on healthcare provider burnout
×
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