Hoekman Lieke Michaela, Smits Marlou Marriet Vera, Koolman Xander
Department of Economics, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
Department of Health Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Health Policy Technol. 2020 Dec;9(4):613-622. doi: 10.1016/j.hlpt.2020.08.008. Epub 2020 Aug 27.
This paper describes the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Netherlands, including policies to reduce the health-related and economic consequences. The Netherlands started with containment and shifted to mitigation within three weeks when implementing a 'mild' lockdown. The initial focus was to obtain herd immunity while preventing Intensive Care Units from getting overwhelmed.
An in-depth analysis of available national and international COVID-19 data sources was conducted. Due to regional variation in COVID-19 hospitalization rates, this paper focuses on three distinct regions; the initial epicenter; the most northern provinces which - contrary to national policy - decided not to switch to mitigation; and the Bible Belt, as congregations of religious groups were initially excluded from the ban on group formation.
On August 11, 6,159 COVID-19 deaths were reported with at the peak an excess mortality Z-score of 21.7. As a result of the pandemic, the economy took a severe hit and is predicted to shrink 6.5% compared to projection. The hospitalization rates in the northern regions were over 70% lower compared to the rest of the country (18 versus 66 per 100,000 inhabitants). Differences between the Bible Belt and the rest of the country were hardly detectable.
The Dutch have shown a way to effectively slow down transmission while allowing more personal and economic freedom than most other countries. Furthermore, the regional differences suggest that containment prevented a surge of infections in the northern provinces. The results should be interpreted with caution, due to the descriptive nature of this study.
本文描述了荷兰新冠疫情最初几个月的情况，包括为减少与健康相关的后果及经济后果所采取的政策。荷兰最初采取遏制措施，并在实施“轻度”封锁的三周内转向缓解措施。最初的重点是在防止重症监护病房不堪重负的同时实现群体免疫。
对现有的国内和国际新冠疫情数据源进行了深入分析。由于新冠住院率存在地区差异，本文重点关注三个不同地区：最初的疫情中心；最北部的省份，这些省份与国家政策相反，决定不转向缓解措施；以及《圣经》 Belt地区，因为宗教团体的集会最初被排除在禁止聚集的禁令之外。
8月11日，报告了6159例新冠死亡病例，死亡人数峰值时的超额死亡率Z评分为21.7。由于疫情，经济遭受重创，预计与预期相比将萎缩6.5%。北部地区的住院率比该国其他地区低70%以上（每10万居民中分别为18例和66例）。《圣经》 Belt地区与该国其他地区之间的差异几乎无法察觉。
荷兰人展示了一种在比大多数其他国家允许更多个人自由和经济自由的同时有效减缓传播的方法。此外，地区差异表明，遏制措施防止了北部省份感染人数激增。由于本研究的描述性质，对结果的解释应谨慎。
