Impact of COVID-19 Containment Measures on Unemployment: A Multi-country Analysis Using a Difference-in-Differences Framework.

BACKGROUND: At the start of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, in the absence of pharmaceutical interventions, countries resorted to containment measures to stem the spread of the disease. In this paper, we have conducted a global study using a sample of 46 countries to evaluate whether these containment measures resulted in unemployment. METHODS: We use a difference-in-differences (DID) specification with a heterogenous intervention to show the varying intensity effect of containment measures on unemployment, on a sample of 46 countries. We explain variations in unemployment from January-June 2020 using stringency of containment measures, controlling for gross domestic product (GDP) growth, inflation rate, exports, cases of COVID-19 per million, COVID-19-specific fiscal spending, time fixed effects, region fixed effects, and region trends. We conduct further subset analyses by COVID-cases quintiles and gross national income (GNI) per capita quintiles. RESULTS: The median level of containment stringency in our sample was 43.7. Our model found that increasing stringency to this level would result in unemployment increasing by 1.87 percentage points (or 1.67 pp, after controlling for confounding). For countries with below median COVID-19 cases and below median GNI per capita, this effect is larger. CONCLUSION: Containment measures have a strong impact on unemployment. This effect is larger in poorer countries and countries with low COVID-19 cases. Given that unemployment has profound effects on mortality and morbidity, this consequence of containment measures may compound the adverse health effects of the pandemic for the most vulnerable groups. It is necessary for governments to consider this in future pandemic management, and to attempt to alleviate the impact of containment measures via effective fiscal spending.

Evaluating the Impact of Intensive Case Management for Severe Vocational Injuries on Work Incapacity and Costs.

Purpose This study investigates the impact of an intensive case management program on sick leave days, permanent work incapacity levels and treatment costs for severe vocational injuries set up by the French National Insurance Fund in five health insurance districts. Methods The method employed relies on a four-step matching procedure combining Coarsened Exact Matching and Propensity Score Matching, based on an original administrative dataset. Average Treatment effects on the Treated were estimated using a parametric model with a large set of covariates. Results After one-year follow-up, workers in the treatment group had higher sickness absence rates, with 22 extra days, and the program led to 2.7 (95% CI 2.3-3.1) times more diagnoses of permanent work incapacity in the treatment group. With an estimated yearly operational cost of 2,722 € per treated worker, the average total extra treatment cost was 4,569 € for treated workers, which corresponds to a cost increase of 29.2% for the insurance fund. Conclusions The higher costs found for the treatment group are mainly due to longer sick leave duration for the moderate severity group, implying higher cash transfers in the form of one-off indemnities. Even though workers in the treated group have more diagnoses of permanent work incapacity, the difference of severity between groups is small. Our results on longer sick leave duration are partly to be explained by interactions between the case managers and the occupational physicians that encouraged patients to stay longer off-work for better recovery, despite the higher costs that this represented for the insurance fund and the well-documented adverse side effects of longer periods off-work.