Cargando…
Comparative analysis of COVID-19 guidelines from six countries: a qualitative study on the US, China, South Korea, the UK, Brazil, and Haiti
BACKGROUND: In late January, a worldwide crisis known as COVID-19 was declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the WHO. Within only a few weeks, the outbreak took on pandemic proportions, affecting over 100 countries. It was a significant issue to prevent and control COVID-19 o...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7711256/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33272250 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-09924-7 |
_version_ | 1783618107235893248 |
---|---|
author | Yoo, Ji Youn Dutra, Samia Valeria Ozorio Fanfan, Dany Sniffen, Sarah Wang, Hao Siddiqui, Jamile Song, Hyo-Suk Bang, Sung Hwan Kim, Dong Eun Kim, Shihoon Groer, Maureen |
author_facet | Yoo, Ji Youn Dutra, Samia Valeria Ozorio Fanfan, Dany Sniffen, Sarah Wang, Hao Siddiqui, Jamile Song, Hyo-Suk Bang, Sung Hwan Kim, Dong Eun Kim, Shihoon Groer, Maureen |
author_sort | Yoo, Ji Youn |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: In late January, a worldwide crisis known as COVID-19 was declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the WHO. Within only a few weeks, the outbreak took on pandemic proportions, affecting over 100 countries. It was a significant issue to prevent and control COVID-19 on both national and global scales due to the dramatic increase in confirmed cases worldwide. Government guidelines provide a fundamental resource for communities, as they guide citizens on how to protect themselves against COVID-19, however, they also provide critical guidance for policy makers and healthcare professionals on how to take action to decrease the spread of COVID-19. We aimed to identify the differences and similarities between six different countries’ (US, China, South Korea, UK, Brazil and Haiti) government-provided community and healthcare system guidelines, and to explore the relationship between guideline issue dates and the prevalence/incidence of COVID-19 cases. METHODS: To make these comparisons, this exploratory qualitative study used document analysis of government guidelines issued to the general public and to healthcare professionals. Documents were purposively sampled (N = 55) and analyzed using content analysis. RESULTS: The major differences in the evaluation and testing criteria in the guidelines across the six countries centered around the priority of testing for COVID-19 in the general population, which was strongly dependent on each country’s healthcare capacity. However, the most similar guidelines pertained to the clinical signs and symptoms of COVID-19, and methods to prevent its contraction. CONCLUSION: In the initial stages of the outbreak, certain strategies were universally employed to control the deadly virus’s spread, including quarantining the sick, contact tracing, and social distancing. However, each country dealt with differing healthcare capacities, risks, threats, political and socioeconomic challenges, and distinct healthcare systems and infrastructure. Acknowledging these differences highlights the importance of examining the various countries’ response to the COVID-19 pandemic with a nuanced view, as each of these factors shaped the government guidelines distributed to each country’s communities and healthcare systems. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-020-09924-7. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7711256 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-77112562020-12-03 Comparative analysis of COVID-19 guidelines from six countries: a qualitative study on the US, China, South Korea, the UK, Brazil, and Haiti Yoo, Ji Youn Dutra, Samia Valeria Ozorio Fanfan, Dany Sniffen, Sarah Wang, Hao Siddiqui, Jamile Song, Hyo-Suk Bang, Sung Hwan Kim, Dong Eun Kim, Shihoon Groer, Maureen BMC Public Health Research Article BACKGROUND: In late January, a worldwide crisis known as COVID-19 was declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the WHO. Within only a few weeks, the outbreak took on pandemic proportions, affecting over 100 countries. It was a significant issue to prevent and control COVID-19 on both national and global scales due to the dramatic increase in confirmed cases worldwide. Government guidelines provide a fundamental resource for communities, as they guide citizens on how to protect themselves against COVID-19, however, they also provide critical guidance for policy makers and healthcare professionals on how to take action to decrease the spread of COVID-19. We aimed to identify the differences and similarities between six different countries’ (US, China, South Korea, UK, Brazil and Haiti) government-provided community and healthcare system guidelines, and to explore the relationship between guideline issue dates and the prevalence/incidence of COVID-19 cases. METHODS: To make these comparisons, this exploratory qualitative study used document analysis of government guidelines issued to the general public and to healthcare professionals. Documents were purposively sampled (N = 55) and analyzed using content analysis. RESULTS: The major differences in the evaluation and testing criteria in the guidelines across the six countries centered around the priority of testing for COVID-19 in the general population, which was strongly dependent on each country’s healthcare capacity. However, the most similar guidelines pertained to the clinical signs and symptoms of COVID-19, and methods to prevent its contraction. CONCLUSION: In the initial stages of the outbreak, certain strategies were universally employed to control the deadly virus’s spread, including quarantining the sick, contact tracing, and social distancing. However, each country dealt with differing healthcare capacities, risks, threats, political and socioeconomic challenges, and distinct healthcare systems and infrastructure. Acknowledging these differences highlights the importance of examining the various countries’ response to the COVID-19 pandemic with a nuanced view, as each of these factors shaped the government guidelines distributed to each country’s communities and healthcare systems. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-020-09924-7. BioMed Central 2020-12-03 /pmc/articles/PMC7711256/ /pubmed/33272250 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-09924-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Yoo, Ji Youn Dutra, Samia Valeria Ozorio Fanfan, Dany Sniffen, Sarah Wang, Hao Siddiqui, Jamile Song, Hyo-Suk Bang, Sung Hwan Kim, Dong Eun Kim, Shihoon Groer, Maureen Comparative analysis of COVID-19 guidelines from six countries: a qualitative study on the US, China, South Korea, the UK, Brazil, and Haiti |
title | Comparative analysis of COVID-19 guidelines from six countries: a qualitative study on the US, China, South Korea, the UK, Brazil, and Haiti |
title_full | Comparative analysis of COVID-19 guidelines from six countries: a qualitative study on the US, China, South Korea, the UK, Brazil, and Haiti |
title_fullStr | Comparative analysis of COVID-19 guidelines from six countries: a qualitative study on the US, China, South Korea, the UK, Brazil, and Haiti |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative analysis of COVID-19 guidelines from six countries: a qualitative study on the US, China, South Korea, the UK, Brazil, and Haiti |
title_short | Comparative analysis of COVID-19 guidelines from six countries: a qualitative study on the US, China, South Korea, the UK, Brazil, and Haiti |
title_sort | comparative analysis of covid-19 guidelines from six countries: a qualitative study on the us, china, south korea, the uk, brazil, and haiti |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7711256/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33272250 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-09924-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT yoojiyoun comparativeanalysisofcovid19guidelinesfromsixcountriesaqualitativestudyontheuschinasouthkoreatheukbrazilandhaiti AT dutrasamiavaleriaozorio comparativeanalysisofcovid19guidelinesfromsixcountriesaqualitativestudyontheuschinasouthkoreatheukbrazilandhaiti AT fanfandany comparativeanalysisofcovid19guidelinesfromsixcountriesaqualitativestudyontheuschinasouthkoreatheukbrazilandhaiti AT sniffensarah comparativeanalysisofcovid19guidelinesfromsixcountriesaqualitativestudyontheuschinasouthkoreatheukbrazilandhaiti AT wanghao comparativeanalysisofcovid19guidelinesfromsixcountriesaqualitativestudyontheuschinasouthkoreatheukbrazilandhaiti AT siddiquijamile comparativeanalysisofcovid19guidelinesfromsixcountriesaqualitativestudyontheuschinasouthkoreatheukbrazilandhaiti AT songhyosuk comparativeanalysisofcovid19guidelinesfromsixcountriesaqualitativestudyontheuschinasouthkoreatheukbrazilandhaiti AT bangsunghwan comparativeanalysisofcovid19guidelinesfromsixcountriesaqualitativestudyontheuschinasouthkoreatheukbrazilandhaiti AT kimdongeun comparativeanalysisofcovid19guidelinesfromsixcountriesaqualitativestudyontheuschinasouthkoreatheukbrazilandhaiti AT kimshihoon comparativeanalysisofcovid19guidelinesfromsixcountriesaqualitativestudyontheuschinasouthkoreatheukbrazilandhaiti AT groermaureen comparativeanalysisofcovid19guidelinesfromsixcountriesaqualitativestudyontheuschinasouthkoreatheukbrazilandhaiti |