China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Are Retailers the New Market Makers?
Published in Tom Lawry, Hacking Healthcare, 2022
As traditional health systems mobilized to take care of those critically ill from COVID, retail health stepped in to play a vital role in serving the needs of health consumers. They filled an access gap for patients who wanted to avoid high-volume care venues such as emergency rooms or hospitals to lower their risk of exposure to COVID. These retailers provided medications and medical consultations. They became critical access centers for food, healthcare, wellness, hygiene, cleaning products, and other common consumer goods needed by everyone forced to shelter in place. As COVID vaccines became available, retailers were the single most viable option to conveniently vaccinate millions of people.
Using transformative action-inquiry during the covid-19 pandemic
Published in John A. Bilorusky, Cases and Stories of Transformative Action Research, 2021
After dramatic reports of the death toll due to the coronavirus in such other countries as China and Italy, the pandemic began to spread throughout the U.S. California was perhaps the first state in the U.S. where business as usual was suspended in an effort to blunt the pandemic’s force. Large numbers of us were sufficiently worried that we agree with the directives of the Governor of California, and at least some other leaders, with only a few exceptions that we should stay at home, or as it has been called, “shelter in place.” This meant closing bars, cancelling public gatherings and events, and even closing restaurants, except for take-out food. Except for some “essential” businesses, people have been required to work from home. Schools and colleges have closed for the last three months of the school year. It has meant banning large gatherings of more than a dozen or so people, and more than just this, requiring that we generally stay at home, except to shop for food, and when going outside keep at least six feet from everyone except those with whom we are living. Some believe that these strong measures have been taken too late.
States Divided
Published in William C. Cockerham, Geoffrey B. Cockerham, The COVID-19 Reader, 2020
Then there was the long-standing argument that the states should lead because they are “laboratories of democracy,” the phrase coined by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis.2 Brandeis enthusiastically argued for experimentation in the states, and David Osborne’s (1990) book of the same name reinforced the case. COVID-19 seemed to be a problem tailor-made for state-based laboratories: individual states could experiment; they could assess what produced the best outcomes; successful experiments could be shared with other states; less successful experiments would be discarded; and the federal government could lead the national effort based on evidence about what worked. COVID-19 was a policy problem of enormous complexity and uncertainty. No one knew quite what it was, how it behaved, or how best to treat it. Why not allow the states that confronted it first try different strategies so that other states, with cases that developed later, could benefit from the successes? Indeed, there is strong evidence that the state-by-state decisions to invoke shelter-in-place orders significantly reduced the spread of the virus (Courtemanche et al. 2020). But the bigger question remains: Was it advisable for the federal government to rely on the decisions of state and local governments to frame policies to control and mitigate a virus that was truly national in scope? That is a question that framed the initial debates about how best to respond to pandemic, and it will cast a deep shadow over American federalism for a very long time.
Digital physical therapy practice and payment during the COVID-19 pandemic: A case series
Published in Physiotherapy Theory and Practice, 2023
The 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has prompted rapid and widespread change in everyday life and in healthcare. Social distancing, keeping a larger space between individuals to reduce disease transmission (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2020), was strongly recommended. In several states, stay-at-home or shelter-in-place orders limited the ability of individuals to leave their homes. Nearly 40% of physical therapy businesses reported exercising their professional judgment by closing their clinics to in-person visits to reduce risk (American Physical Therapy Association, 2020b). This widespread closure was likely because physical therapists often treat individuals with multiple comorbidities (Boissonnault, 1999) and those aged 65 years and older, who are more likely to be hospitalized (Richardson et al., 2020) and die (Xie et al., 2020) from the virus. However, the adoption of prudent social distancing measures means less direct contact between physical therapists and their patients. As a result, an urgent need for digital physical therapy practice emerged.
Pediatric poison exposures reported to United States poison centers before and during the COVID-19 pandemic
Published in Clinical Toxicology, 2022
Hailee R. Ciccotti, Henry A. Spiller, Marcel J. Casavant, Sandhya Kistamgari, Alexandra R. Funk, Gary A. Smith
The COVID-19 pandemic, which was declared a national emergency in the United States (US) on 13 March 2020, has had a pronounced impact on the nation’s public health, including poisoning [1–3]. Shelter-in-place restrictions in early 2020 resulted in many people remaining at home as workplaces and schools closed. Therefore, it is important to investigate the association of the pandemic with poison exposures among youth, especially those occurring to young children in the home. Previous studies have examined poisoning exposures reported to poison centers (PCs) in the US [1,4] and other countries [3,5] and treated in emergency departments [3] during the pandemic. However, these previous studies often included pandemic study periods of less than one year, only examined ingestions or specific consumer products, did not focus on children, or lacked more sophisticated analyses such as interrupted time series analysis.
Pediatric Mental Healthcare Providers’ Perceptions of the Delivery of Partial Hospitalization and Outpatient Services via Telehealth during the COVID-19 Pandemic
Published in Evidence-Based Practice in Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 2022
Patrick W. Romani, Sarah M. Kennedy, Kimberly Sheffield, Alexandra M. Ament, Marissa A. Schiel, Jessica Hawks, James Murphy
The worldwide pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus disease of 2019, better known as COVID-19, has produced the worst public health crisis in over 100 years (Walke et al., 2020; Wiersinga et al., 2020). As COVID-19 spread throughout the United States, many states put restrictive measures into place (e.g., shelter-in-place orders; school closures) to mitigate community spread of this deadly disease (Snape & Viner, 2020). Shelter-in-place orders meant that only “essential personnel,” like healthcare workers, could leave home and attend work. Non-essential personnel transitioned to remote work using videoconferencing platforms, like Zoom and GoToMeeting, to communicate with colleagues. Besides the obvious disruption of transitioning to a new mode of working with very short notice, adults with school-age children had an added challenge to simultaneously function as home-school supports, child-care providers, and professionals. To protect staff and patients, many ambulatory services within hospital settings temporarily closed or shifted to delivering services via telehealth.