The U.S. Health Care System on the Eve of the Covid-19 Epidemic: A Summary of Recent Evidence on Its Impaired Performance

Mechanisms of the Chinese Government's Efforts to Fight COVID-19: Integration of Top-down Interventions and Local Governance

The experiences and lessons of China's response to COVID-19 have been described in several studies, but the mechanisms of the Chinese government's efforts to fight COVID-19 have not been well characterized. Despite strong policy directives and orders from the central government, the response and handling of the epidemic also reflected distinctive characteristics of local governments in terms of their governance systems and capacities. In this article, the authors analyze public health policies and mechanisms of the Chinese government's response to COVID-19 based on the integration of top-down and local governance. A compendium of key events and measures provides the foundation for our analysis. Mechanisms related to leadership, emergency response, centralized mobilization, and accountability fully reflect the decisive measures for top-down interventions in the face of emergencies. China's policies and mechanisms to address the COVID-19 pandemic are consistent with its party-state bureaucracy and socioeconomic context. However, lower levels of government have used "repeated increments" and "one-size-fits-all" practices in the implementation of antiepidemic policies. Conservative local officials are more averse to social innovation and favor strict controls to manage the pandemic. Moreover, even under a unified system, there are substantial differences in the capacity and level of crisis management among local governments, especially in the mobilization of nonprofit organizations and volunteers. In this case study, we aim to expand the existing understanding of the tension between top-down interventions and local governance innovations.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and policy response on health care utilization: Evidence from county-level medical claims and cellphone data

The COVID-19 pandemic has forced federal, state, and local policymakers to respond by legislating, enacting, and enforcing social distancing policies. However, the impact of these policies on healthcare utilization in the United States has been largely unexplored. We examine the impact of county-level shelter in place ordinances on healthcare utilization using two unique datasets-employer-sponsored insurance for over 6 million people in the US and cell phone location data. We find that introduction of these policies was associated with reductions in the use of preventive care, elective care, and the number of weekly visits to physician offices, hospitals and other health care-related industries. However, controlling for county-level exposure to the COVID-19 pandemic as a way to account for the endogenous nature of policy implementation reduces the impact of these policies. Our results imply that while social distancing policies do lead to reductions in healthcare utilization, much of these reductions would have occurred even in the absence of these policies.

I Am a Nurse, Not a Martyr: Qualitative Investigation of Nurses' Experiences During Onset of the Coronavirus Pandemic

Nurses have always played an essential role during epidemics, risking their lives caring for sick and dying patients. However, the unprecedented nature of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has left organizations and healthcare professionals ill-prepared and under-equipped to manage the severity, manifestations, and acute and long-term implications. While COVID-19 has presented profound physical and mental health implications for nurses, we know little about nurses' professional experiences within their organizational context. Thus, this qualitative descriptive study fills that gap through in-depth exploration of nurses' shared professional experiences working in hospitals during the first surge of COVID-19 in the United States. Twenty-two nurses were interviewed via telephone during April and May 2020. Through thematic analysis four main themes emerged: (1) fear, (2) collective resilience through shared trauma, (3) uncharted territory, and (4) perceived disposability. Nurses felt ill-praepared for the rapid changes wrought by COVID-19; yet they also felt proud with a renewed sense of meaning in their work. While unit colleagues were a great source of strength, nurses still reported disappointment, even feeling abandoned by their organizations. Our study indicates that nurses relied on one another to cope and find meaning. These findings are invaluable for policy development and the establishment of preventive and early intervention strategies. Done right, such efforts could better support nurses by encouraging team building, protection, and rewards to maintain nurses' wellbeing during such outbreaks and in their aftermath. Organizations also ought to make nurses' health and wellbeing a priority by streamlining communication, transparency, and leadership visibility.

Association Between COVID-19 Relief Funds and Hospital Characteristics in the US

Question

What is the association between financial assistance through the High-Impact Distribution Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act program and hospital-level financial resources?

Findings

In this cross-sectional study among 952 hospital-level entities, wide ranges existed in CARES Act funding, with 24% of hospitals receiving less than $5 million in funding and 8% receiving more than $50 million. Academic-affiliated hospitals with higher pre–COVID-19 assets and hospitals that had higher COVID-19 cases received higher levels of funding, while critical access hospitals received lower levels of financial assistance.

Meaning

CARES Act funds may have disproportionately gone to hospitals that were in a stronger financial situation prior to the pandemic compared with those that were not, but funds also went disproportionately to those that eventually had the most cases.

Importance

In response to financial stress created by the reduction in care during the COVID-19 pandemic, hospitals received financial assistance through the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act program. To date, the allocation of CARES Act funding is not well understood.

Objective

To examine the disbursement of the High-Impact Distribution CARES Act funds and the association between financial assistance and hospital-level financial resources prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional analysis of US-based hospitals and health systems assesses the hospital characteristics associated with CARES Act funding with linear regression models using linked hospital and health system–level information on CARES Act funding with hospital characteristics from Hospital Cost Report data.

Exposures

Hospital and health system CARES Act financial assistance.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Hospital and health system affiliation, status, and financial health prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Data analysis took place from December 2020 through June 2021.

Results

The analysis included 952 hospital-level entities with an average payment of $33.6 million, most of which was received during the first payment round. Wide ranges existed in CARES Act funding, with 24% of matched hospitals receiving less than $5 million in funding and 8% receiving more than $50 million. Academic-affiliated hospitals, hospitals with higher pre–COVID-19 assets and hospitals with higher COVID-19 cases received higher levels of funding, while critical access hospitals received lower levels of financial assistance. A 10% increase in hospital assets, endowment size, and COVID-19 cases was associated with 1.4% (95% CI, 0.8% to 2.0%; P = .003), 0.2% (95% CI, 0.1% to 0.3%; P < .001), and 3.5% (95% CI, 2.8% to 4.2%; P < .001) increases in CARES Act funding, respectively.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cross-sectional study of US hospitals and health systems, findings suggest that High-Impact Distribution CARES Act funds may have disproportionately gone to hospitals that were in a stronger financial situation prior to the pandemic compared with those that were not, but funds also went disproportionately to those that eventually had the most cases.

COVID-19 Outbreak Management and Vaccination Strategy in The United States of America

Four months after the first case of COVID-19 was reported in the United States, the SARS-CoV-2 virus had spread to more than 90% of all counties. Although the transmission of the virus can be grossly mitigated through non-pharmaceutical interventions and public health measures, risks of future outbreaks, emergence of more infectious variants, and disruptions to socio-economic life will probably remain until effective vaccines are administered to large portions of the global population. An exceptional collaboration between governments and the scientific community has led to the authorization of eight vaccines globally for full use, four of which were funded and developed in the United States. In this paper, we contextualize epidemiological, political, and economic impacts of the COVID-19 vaccination strategy in the United States of America between 20 January 2020, to 5 May 2021, with a key focus on vaccine hesitancy and public-private partnerships.

Universal Health Care for the United States: A Primer for Health Care Providers

The United States is one of a very few high-income countries that does not guarantee every person the right to health care. Residents of the United States pay more out-of-pocket for increasingly worse outcomes. People of color, those who have lower incomes, and those who live in rural areas have less access to health care and are therefore at even greater risk for poor health. Universal health care, a term for various models of health care systems that provide care for every resident of a given country, will help move the United States toward higher quality, more affordable, and more equitable care. This article defines a reproductive justice and human rights foundation for universal health care, explores how health insurance has worked historically in the United States, identifies the economic reasons for implementing universal health care, and discusses international models that could be used domestically.

Evaluation of China's public health system response to COVID-19

Background

The focus of the study is to assess the advantages and shortcomings of China's public health system in the process of the COVID-19 prevention and to discuss the future reform of China's public health system.

Methods

By searching literature and reports related to the COVID-19 prevention of China, we compared the prevention effectiveness with the prevention policies in the process of the COVID-19 prevention.

Results

China's public health system can effectively combine national power to maximize the effectiveness of pandemic prevention. It improved the pandemic prevention ability of communities continuously and promoted the fairness of prevention. Traditional Chinese Medicine has also been used in pandemic prevention, which reduces the drug resistance of the virus. At the same time, the combination of the disease diagnosis and the Internet has reduced the spread speed of the pandemic. China's public health system also has some problems in response to the COVID-19, such as the shortage of medical resources, insufficient alerts, the low efficiency of reporting to superior government and the shortage of reward and punishment system for pandemic prevention.

Conclusions

China's practice and efforts of the COVID-19 prevention can provide experience for other countries to improve their public health systems and accelerate the end of the COVID-19 pandemic.