英国对 COVID-19 大流行病的准备和早期响应。

IF 2.3 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Global Public Health Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-21 DOI:10.1080/17441692.2024.2415499
Jochem Rietveld, Tom Hobson, Lara Mani, Shahar Avin, Lalitha Sundaram
{"title":"英国对 COVID-19 大流行病的准备和早期响应。","authors":"Jochem Rietveld, Tom Hobson, Lara Mani, Shahar Avin, Lalitha Sundaram","doi":"10.1080/17441692.2024.2415499","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article focuses on the UK's pre-COVID 19 pandemic preparedness and its early response to the COVID-19 pandemic (January '20 - March '20). The aim of this article is to explain the high excess mortality the UK experienced compared to many of its international and European peers in the first wave, which is contrary to the country's high ranking in pre-COVID-19 preparedness rankings. The article assesses the various components of pre-COVID-19 pandemic preparedness such as pandemic strategy, exercises, and stockpiles, and it covers government decision making processes on the early response, including questions around post-travel quarantining, test and trace, and mobility restrictions. The article concludes that there were important deficiencies in the UK's pandemic preparedness and early response in the COVID-19 pandemic. These include the centrality of the 'inevitability of spread'-assumption underpinning the UK's pandemic planning pre-COVID, the insufficient implementation of pandemic exercise recommendations, the lack of early and 'live learning' from other countries' experiences, the lack of adoption of public health advice of the World Health Organisation early on, the late implementation of internal mobility restrictions, the lack of timely consideration of alternative early pandemic response models, and fragilities in the SAGE/governmental interplay.</p>","PeriodicalId":12735,"journal":{"name":"Global Public Health","volume":"19 1","pages":"2415499"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The UK's pandemic preparedness and early response to the COVID-19 pandemic.\",\"authors\":\"Jochem Rietveld, Tom Hobson, Lara Mani, Shahar Avin, Lalitha Sundaram\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17441692.2024.2415499\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This article focuses on the UK's pre-COVID 19 pandemic preparedness and its early response to the COVID-19 pandemic (January '20 - March '20). The aim of this article is to explain the high excess mortality the UK experienced compared to many of its international and European peers in the first wave, which is contrary to the country's high ranking in pre-COVID-19 preparedness rankings. The article assesses the various components of pre-COVID-19 pandemic preparedness such as pandemic strategy, exercises, and stockpiles, and it covers government decision making processes on the early response, including questions around post-travel quarantining, test and trace, and mobility restrictions. The article concludes that there were important deficiencies in the UK's pandemic preparedness and early response in the COVID-19 pandemic. These include the centrality of the 'inevitability of spread'-assumption underpinning the UK's pandemic planning pre-COVID, the insufficient implementation of pandemic exercise recommendations, the lack of early and 'live learning' from other countries' experiences, the lack of adoption of public health advice of the World Health Organisation early on, the late implementation of internal mobility restrictions, the lack of timely consideration of alternative early pandemic response models, and fragilities in the SAGE/governmental interplay.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12735,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Public Health\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"2415499\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Public Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2024.2415499\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Public Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17441692.2024.2415499","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文重点介绍了英国在 COVID-19 大流行前的准备情况及其对 COVID-19 大流行的早期响应(20 年 1 月至 20 年 3 月)。本文旨在解释与许多国际和欧洲同行相比,英国在第一波疫情中经历的高超额死亡率,这与英国在 COVID-19 前准备工作排名中的高名次背道而驰。文章评估了第 19 次大流行前准备工作的各个组成部分,如大流行战略、演习和储备,并介绍了政府早期应对的决策过程,包括旅行后隔离、检测和追踪以及流动限制等问题。文章的结论是,在 COVID-19 大流行中,英国的大流行准备和早期应对工作存在重大缺陷。这些缺陷包括:"传播不可避免 "的假设是英国在 COVID 之前进行大流行规划的基础、大流行演习建议的实施不充分、缺乏对其他国家经验的早期和 "现场学习"、缺乏对世界卫生组织公共卫生建议的早期采纳、内部流动限制的实施较晚、缺乏对其他早期大流行响应模式的及时考虑,以及 SAGE/政府相互作用的脆弱性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The UK's pandemic preparedness and early response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

This article focuses on the UK's pre-COVID 19 pandemic preparedness and its early response to the COVID-19 pandemic (January '20 - March '20). The aim of this article is to explain the high excess mortality the UK experienced compared to many of its international and European peers in the first wave, which is contrary to the country's high ranking in pre-COVID-19 preparedness rankings. The article assesses the various components of pre-COVID-19 pandemic preparedness such as pandemic strategy, exercises, and stockpiles, and it covers government decision making processes on the early response, including questions around post-travel quarantining, test and trace, and mobility restrictions. The article concludes that there were important deficiencies in the UK's pandemic preparedness and early response in the COVID-19 pandemic. These include the centrality of the 'inevitability of spread'-assumption underpinning the UK's pandemic planning pre-COVID, the insufficient implementation of pandemic exercise recommendations, the lack of early and 'live learning' from other countries' experiences, the lack of adoption of public health advice of the World Health Organisation early on, the late implementation of internal mobility restrictions, the lack of timely consideration of alternative early pandemic response models, and fragilities in the SAGE/governmental interplay.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Global Public Health
Global Public Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
3.00%
发文量
120
期刊介绍: Global Public Health is an essential peer-reviewed journal that energetically engages with key public health issues that have come to the fore in the global environment — mounting inequalities between rich and poor; the globalization of trade; new patterns of travel and migration; epidemics of newly-emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases; the HIV/AIDS pandemic; the increase in chronic illnesses; escalating pressure on public health infrastructures around the world; and the growing range and scale of conflict situations, terrorist threats, environmental pressures, natural and human-made disasters.
期刊最新文献
Hypothetical acceptability of minimally invasive tissue sampling and considerations for practice: A qualitative study in Vietnam Unravelling the nexus of microfinance and women’s non-communicable disease (NCD) health outcomes in Sri Lanka: An exploratory study Can health promotion facilitate development in fragile states?: An instrumental variable estimation with panel data The health workforce conundrum for burn care in Uttar Pradesh, India: a qualitative exploration Access to adolescent sexual and reproductive health services in Accra, Ghana: An exploratory qualitative study
×
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