Department of Political Science, Institute for Advanced Study of the Americas, University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida, USA
Department of Political Science, Institute for Advanced Study of the Americas, University of Miami, Coral Gables, Florida, USA.
BMJ Glob Health. 2021 Jun;6(6). doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005223.
To present an analysis of the Brazilian health system and subnational (state) variation in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, based on 10 non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs).
We collected daily information on implementation of 10 NPI designed to inform the public of health risks and promote distancing and mask use at the national level for eight countries across the Americas. We then analyse the adoption of the 10 policies across Brazil's 27 states over time, individually and using a composite index. We draw on this index to assess the timeliness and rigour of NPI implementation across the country, from the date of the first case, 26 February 2020. We also compile Google data on population mobility by state to describe changes in mobility throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.
Brazil's national NPI response was the least stringent among countries analysed. In the absence of a unified federal response to the pandemic, Brazilian state policy implementation was neither homogenous nor synchronised. The median NPI was no stay-at-home order, a recommendation to wear masks in public space but not a requirement, a full school closure and partial restrictions on businesses, public transportation, intrastate travel, interstate travel and international travel. These restrictions were implemented 45 days after the first case in each state, on average. Rondônia implemented the earliest and most rigorous policies, with school closures, business closures, information campaigns and restrictions on movement 24 days after the first case; Mato Grosso do Sul had the fewest, least stringent restrictions on movement, business operations and no mask recommendation.
The study identifies wide variation in national-level NPI responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Our focus on Brazil identifies subsequent variability in how and when states implemented NPI to contain COVID-19. States' NPIs and their scores on the composite policy index both align with the governors' political affiliations: opposition governors implemented earlier, more stringent sanitary measures than those supporting the Bolsonaro administration. A strong, unified national response to a pandemic is essential for keeping the population safe and disease-free, both at the outset of an outbreak and as communities begin to reopen. This national response should be aligned with state and municipal implementation of NPI, which we show is not the case in Brazil.
本研究旨在分析巴西卫生系统以及各州(省)对 COVID-19 大流行的反应,分析基于 10 项非药物干预措施(NPI)。
我们收集了 8 个美洲国家在全国范围内实施 10 项 NPI 措施的每日信息,这些措施旨在向公众宣传健康风险并促进社交距离和戴口罩。然后,我们分析了随着时间的推移,巴西 27 个州对这 10 项政策的采用情况,分别分析并使用综合指数进行分析。我们利用这一指数评估了从 2020 年 2 月 26 日首例病例开始,全国范围内 NPI 实施的及时性和严格性。我们还整理了各州的谷歌人口流动数据,以描述整个 COVID-19 大流行期间的流动变化。
在分析的国家中,巴西的国家 NPI 反应最不严格。在没有统一的联邦大流行应对措施的情况下,巴西各州的政策实施既不统一也不同步。中位数 NPI 是没有居家令,建议在公共场所戴口罩但不强制,全面关闭学校和部分限制企业、公共交通、州内旅行、州际旅行和国际旅行。这些限制措施平均在各州首例病例出现后 45 天实施。罗多尼亚州最早实施最严格的政策,在首例病例出现后 24 天就关闭了学校、关闭了企业、开展宣传活动并限制了流动;南马托格罗索州的流动、企业运营和不建议戴口罩的限制最少,也最宽松。
本研究确定了 COVID-19 大流行期间国家一级 NPI 应对措施的广泛差异。我们对巴西的关注确定了各州随后如何以及何时实施 NPI 来控制 COVID-19 的差异。各州的 NPI 及其在综合政策指数上的得分都与州长的政治派别一致:反对派州长比支持博索纳罗政府的州长更早、更严格地实施了卫生措施。大流行期间,强有力的、统一的国家应对措施对于保护民众的安全和健康至关重要,无论是在疫情爆发之初还是在社区开始重新开放之时。这种国家应对措施应该与州和市级的 NPI 实施保持一致,但我们在巴西的情况并非如此。