There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.
Abstract
The ongoing epidemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is devastating, despite
extensive implementation of control measures. The outbreak was sparked in Wuhan, the
capital city of Hubei province in China, and quickly spread to different regions of
Hubei and across all other Chinese provinces.
As recorded by the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (China CDC),
by Feb 16, 2020, there had been 70 641 confirmed cases and 1772 deaths due to COVID-19,
with an average mortality of about 2·5%.
1
However, in-depth analysis of these data show clear disparities in mortality rates
between Wuhan (>3%), different regions of Hubei (about 2·9% on average), and across
the other provinces of China (about 0·7% on average). We postulate that this is likely
to be related to the rapid escalation in the number of infections around the epicentre
of the outbreak, which has resulted in an insufficiency of health-care resources,
thereby negatively affecting patient outcomes in Hubei, while this has not yet been
the situation for the other parts of China (figure A, B
). If we assume that average levels of health care are similar throughout China, higher
numbers of infections in a given population can be considered an indirect indicator
of a heavier health-care burden. Plotting mortality against the incidence of COVID-19
(cumulative number of confirmed cases since the start of the outbreak, per 10 000
population) showed a significant positive correlation (figure C), suggesting that
mortality is correlated with health-care burden.
Figure
Mortality and incidence of COVID-19 in Hubei and other provinces of China
Mortality (A) and cumulative number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 since the start
of the outbreak per 10 000 population (B) in Hubei and other provinces of China. Horizontal
lines represent median and IQR. p values were from Mann-Whitney U test. (C) Correlation
between mortality and number of cases per 10 000 population (Spearman method). Data
were obtained from the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention to Feb 16,
2020. COVID-19=coronavirus disease 2019.
In reality, there are substantial regional disparities in health-care resource availability
and accessibility in China.
2
Such disparities might partly explain the low mortality rates—despite high numbers
of cases—in the most developed southeastern coastal provinces, such as Zhejiang (0
deaths among 1171 confirmed cases) and Guangdong (four deaths among 1322 cases [0·3%]).
The Chinese government has realised the logistical hurdles associated with medical
supplies in the epicentre of the outbreak, and has strived to accelerate deliveries,
mobilise the country's large and strong medical forces, and rapidly build new local
medical facilities. These measures are essential for controlling the epidemic, protecting
health workers on the front line, and mitigating the severity of patient outcomes.
Acknowledging the potential association of mortality with health-care resource availability
might help other regions of China, which are now beginning to struggle with this outbreak,
to be better prepared. More importantly, as COVID-19 is already affecting at least
29 countries and territories worldwide, including one north African country, the situation
in China could help to inform other resource-limited regions on how to prepare for
possible local outbreaks.
3
With cases of novel coronavirus spreading worldwide, governments and institutions are getting ready for the first cases in Africa. Munyaradzi Makoni reports from Cape Town. On Jan 30, WHO Director-General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus declared that the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) epidemic, centred in China, was a public health emergency of international concern. A large part of WHO's reasoning was that “a global coordinated effort is needed to enhance preparedness in other regions of the world”. As cases continue to rise, and spread worldwide, governments and institutions are taking action to prepare for the first patients in Africa. “The risk and likelihood of getting an outbreak is very, very high”, said Ambrose Talisuna, the WHO Africa team lead for emergency preparedness. As of Feb 11, Africa does not have any confirmed cases, but suspected patients have been quarantined in Ethiopia, Kenya, Côte d'Ivoire, and Botswana. Dr Tedros announced on Feb 5 that a US$675 million preparedness and response plan covering February to April, 2020, had been initiated by the international community for China and globally to protect states with weaker health systems. WHO has prioritised support for 13 countries on the basis of their close transport links with China: Algeria, Angola, Côte d'Ivoire, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Mauritius, Nigeria, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia. “We all know how fragile health systems [are] in the African continent, they are already overwhelmed by many outbreaks. For us, it is critical to detect coronavirus earlier [so] that we can prevent spreading within communities that can trigger a number of cases that can overwhelm the treatment capacity”, said Michel Yao, WHO Africa programme manager for emergency operations. The strategy is to prepare country technical guidance, advising ministries of health on how to limit human-to-human transmission, ensure countries have capacity to isolate and provide appropriate treatment to affected people, Yao said. The Africa Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC) established the Africa Task Force for Novel Coronavirus on Feb 3. It is working with WHO on surveillance, including screening at points of entry, infection prevention and control in health-care facilities, clinical management of people with severe 2019-nCoV infection, laboratory diagnosis, and risk communication and community engagement. The Director of Africa CDC, John Nkengasong, outlined the threat to Africa posed by 2019-nCoV. “This disease is a serious threat to the social dynamics, economic growth, and security of Africa”, said Nkengasong. “If we do not detect and contain disease outbreaks early, we cannot achieve our developmental goals.” Yao said WHO is working with various partners to ensure that there is a proper screening process at the main points of entry, that suspected cases are isolated, and that protective equipment is provided. The guidance requires that alerts be raised on suspected cases. Health workers have been taught how to behave in front of people with suspected or confirmed infection. In-country incidence management teams have also been set up. Even in countries where there is instability, such as South Sudan, coordination mechanisms have been worked out to reach health workers and patients. Thanks to Ebola, Yao said, most of the countries have isolation infrastructure. “We are pushing for the continent to be very vigilant”, he added. Hilde De Clerck, emerging infections adviser with Médecins Sans Frontières, made the point that some health systems are already well organised and have able leadership but will have to adapt to respond successfully to an outbreak. South Africa's National Institute of Communicable Diseases and Senegal's Institut Pasteur were initially the only referral laboratories on the continent, and so were responsible for testing samples from other African countries. By Feb 4, more countries—Ghana, Madagascar, Sierra Leone, and Nigeria—were also able to do testing themselves. As of Feb 10, WHO said that 11 countries were capable of testing for 2019-nCoV, and reagents should be delivered to other countries this week. Africa's preparedness efforts have been boosted with $25 million from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, with some of it going towards training. 15 experts from the African Union received training on laboratory diagnosis for 2019-nCoV in Dakar, Senegal, on Feb 6–8. WHO is also supporting training in Ethiopia and other countries on isolation and treatment and care of infected patients.
Healthcare disparity is, to a large extent, ascribable to the uneven distribution of high-quality healthcare resources, which remains insufficiently examined, largely due to data unavailability. To overcome this barrier, we synthesized multiple sources of data, employed integrated methods and made a comprehensive analysis of government administrative structures and the socio-economic environment to build probably the most inclusive dataset of Chinese 3-A hospitals thus far. Calibrated on a sample of 379 hospitals rated by a reputable organization, we developed a realistic and viable evaluation framework for assessing hospital quality in China. We then calculated performance scores for 1246 3-A hospitals, which were aggregated and further analyzed at multiple scales (cities, provinces, regions, and economic zones) using general entropy indexes. This research shows that the fragmented governance and incoordination of “kuai” and “tiao” is rooted deeply in China’s legacy of centrally-planned systems, and has had a far-reaching yet partially contradictory influence over the contemporary distribution and performance of healthcare resources. Additionally, the unevenness in the distribution of healthcare resources is related closely to a city’s administrative rank and power. This study thus suggests that the policy design of healthcare systems should be coordinated with external socio-economic transformation in a sustainable manner.
Publisher:
The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.
ISSN
(Electronic):
2214-109X
Publication date PMC-release: 25
February
2020
Publication date
(Print):
April
2020
Publication date
(Electronic):
25
February
2020
Volume: 8
Issue: 4
Page: e480
Affiliations
[a
]Key Laboratory of Biotechnology and Bioengineering of State Ethnic Affairs Commission,
Biomedical Research Center, Northwest Minzu University, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
[b
]Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Erasmus MC-University Medical Center,
Rotterdam, Netherlands
Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information
in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre
is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website.
Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is
available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately
available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO
COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form
or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are
granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.
scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.