Department of Family and Community Medicine, Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California San Francisco, 995 Potrero Avenue, Building 80, Ward 83, San Francisco, CA, 94110, USA.
Louisiana Public Health Institute, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.
BMC Public Health. 2022 Oct 10;22(1):1882. doi: 10.1186/s12889-022-14132-6.
It is increasingly recognized that policies have played a role in both alleviating and exacerbating the health and economic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. There has been limited systematic evaluation of variation in U.S. local COVID-19-related policies. This study introduces the U.S. COVID-19 County Policy (UCCP) Database, whose objective is to systematically gather, characterize, and assess variation in U.S. county-level COVID-19-related policies.
In January-March 2021, we collected an initial wave of cross-sectional data from government and media websites for 171 counties in 7 states on 22 county-level COVID-19-related policies within 3 policy domains that are likely to affect health: (1) containment/closure, (2) economic support, and (3) public health. We characterized the presence and comprehensiveness of policies using univariate analyses. We also examined the correlation of policies with one another using bivariate Spearman's correlations. Finally, we examined geographical variation in policies across and within states.
There was substantial variation in the presence and comprehensiveness of county policies during January-March 2021. For containment and closure policies, the percent of counties with no restrictions ranged from 0% (for public events) to more than half for public transportation (67.8%), hair salons (52.6%), and religious gatherings (52.0%). For economic policies, 76.6% of counties had housing support, while 64.9% had utility relief. For public health policies, most were comprehensive, with 70.8% of counties having coordinated public information campaigns, and 66.7% requiring masks outside the home at all times. Correlations between containment and closure policies tended to be positive and moderate (i.e., coefficients 0.4-0.59). There was variation within and across states in the number and comprehensiveness of policies.
This study introduces the UCCP Database, presenting granular data on local governments' responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. We documented substantial variation within and across states on a wide range of policies at a single point in time. By making these data publicly available, this study supports future research that can leverage this database to examine how policies contributed to and continue to influence pandemic-related health and socioeconomic outcomes and disparities. The UCCP database is available online and will include additional time points for 2020-2021 and additional counties nationwide.
人们越来越认识到，政策在缓解和加剧 COVID-19 大流行的健康和经济后果方面发挥了作用。对美国地方 COVID-19 相关政策的变化，系统评估的工作做得还很有限。本研究介绍了美国 COVID-19 县政策数据库（UCCP），其目的是系统地收集、描述和评估美国县级 COVID-19 相关政策的变化。
在 2021 年 1 月至 3 月，我们从政府和媒体网站上收集了 7 个州的 171 个县在 COVID-19 相关的 3 个政策领域（1）遏制/关闭、（2）经济支持、（3）公共卫生内的 22 项县一级政策的初始横断面数据。我们使用单变量分析来描述政策的存在和全面性。我们还使用双变量斯皮尔曼相关分析来检查政策之间的相关性。最后，我们检查了州内和州际政策的地理差异。
在 2021 年 1 月至 3 月期间，县政策的存在和全面性存在很大差异。在遏制和关闭政策方面，没有限制的县的比例范围从 0%（公共活动）到一半以上（公共交通 67.8%，发廊 52.6%，宗教集会 52.0%）。在经济政策方面，76.6%的县有住房支持，而 64.9%的县有公用事业救济。在公共卫生政策方面，大多数政策都很全面，有 70.8%的县开展了协调一致的公共信息宣传活动，有 66.7%的县要求在家外出时始终戴口罩。遏制和关闭政策之间的相关性往往是正相关和中度相关（即系数为 0.4-0.59）。在政策的数量和全面性方面，州内和州际之间存在差异。
本研究介绍了 UCCP 数据库，提供了地方政府对 COVID-19 大流行反应的详细数据。我们在单一时间点记录了州内和州际之间在广泛政策上的大量差异。通过公开这些数据，本研究支持未来的研究，这些研究可以利用这个数据库来检查政策如何促成并继续影响与大流行相关的健康和社会经济结果以及差异。UCCP 数据库在线提供，并将包括 2020-2021 年的其他时间点和全国其他县的数据。
