Falkenbach Michelle, Willison Charley
Department of Public and Ecosystem Health, Cornell University, 618 Tower Rd., Ithaca, NY 14850, USA.
Health Policy Technol. 2022 Jun;11(2):100618. doi: 10.1016/j.hlpt.2022.100618. Epub 2022 Mar 25.
This paper presents an overview of the vaccination policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in Denmark, Canada, and the United States until September 1, 2021. The article seeks to understand the reasons for vaccination differences among high-income, liberal democracies.
The country cases were selected based on tiers of population-level vaccination uptake within six months after vaccines became broadly available (for high-income countries). We conducted a rapid review of primary data for each country case. Through a graphical and descriptive analysis, we evaluated common patterns as well as significant divergences in the vaccination rollout across countries and its relationship with COVID-19 health outcomes, government policy responses, resource constraints, and socio-political factors. This inductive analysis provides a sense of how resource constraints compare with current political contexts in each country case that may influence the public's response to a national vaccination strategy.
Resources, socio-economic factors, and health outcomes related to COVID-19 do not ensure vaccination policy success as the case of the United States makes clear. Instead, trust in government and health systems appear to promise a higher vaccination uptake and maintained support for measures during a pandemic. Trust in government can be defined as the confidence citizens have that governmental actions will do what is right and perceived as fair.
Denmark, the United States, and Canada are high-income liberal democracies with very different vaccine strategies and subsequently different vaccination outcomes across their populations. What appears to be critical to successful vaccination outcomes is high trust in government or health officials, along with the depoliticization of the COVID-19 pandemic among the country's political parties.
本文概述了截至2021年9月1日丹麦、加拿大和美国针对新冠疫情的疫苗接种政策应对措施。本文旨在了解高收入自由民主国家之间疫苗接种存在差异的原因。
根据疫苗广泛可用后六个月内的人群层面疫苗接种率层级(针对高收入国家)选择国家案例。我们对每个国家案例的原始数据进行了快速审查。通过图形和描述性分析,我们评估了各国疫苗接种推广中的常见模式以及显著差异,及其与新冠疫情健康结果、政府政策应对、资源限制和社会政治因素的关系。这种归纳分析让人了解到在每个国家案例中,资源限制与当前政治背景相比情况如何,而这些政治背景可能会影响公众对国家疫苗接种策略的反应。
正如美国的情况所表明的,与新冠疫情相关的资源、社会经济因素和健康结果并不能确保疫苗接种政策的成功。相反,对政府和卫生系统的信任似乎有望带来更高的疫苗接种率,并在疫情期间维持对各项措施的支持。对政府的信任可以定义为公民对政府行动会做正确之事并被视为公平的信心。
丹麦、美国和加拿大都是高收入自由民主国家,它们有着截然不同的疫苗策略,因而整个人口中的疫苗接种结果也不同。对成功的疫苗接种结果而言,关键似乎是对政府或卫生官员的高度信任,以及该国各政党之间新冠疫情的非政治化。