Disruption Of Non-COVID-19 Health Care In Latin America During The Pandemic: Effects On Health, Lessons For Policy.

COVID-19 had severe direct and indirect effects on health and well-being in Latin America. To understand the extent to which disruptions among non-COVID-19-related health services affected population health, we used administrative data from the period 2015-21 to examine public hospital discharges and mortality for conditions amenable to health care in four Latin American countries: Brazil, Ecuador, Mexico, and Peru. Between March 2020 and December 2021, hospitalization rates for these conditions declined by 28 percent and mortality rates increased by 15 percent relative to prepandemic years. Noncommunicable diseases accounted for 89 percent of this rise in mortality. The poorest states in each country experienced relatively larger increases in mortality. Our results, which focus on the health effects of service disruption, suggest that maintaining health care services in this region during the pandemic could have avoided at least 96,000 deaths. Policies should focus on maintaining essential health care services during emergencies, particularly for patients with noncommunicable diseases, and on minimizing negative consequences by ensuring coordinated and continuous care; leveraging alternative modalities of care, such as telemedicine; broadening the role of nonphysician health care workers; and expanding options for medication delivery.

Outcomes associated with scheduling or up-scheduling controlled substances.

BACKGROUND: Many nations place drugs into various "schedules" according to their risk of abuse and/or recognized medical value that vary in terms of their restrictions. To mitigate diversion or abuse, drugs sometimes get rescheduled or are scheduled for the first time. Until now, there have not been efforts to integrate lessons from across the range of such past events. METHODS AND DATA: We searched for peer-reviewed evaluations of instances of (re-)scheduling drugs in the United States after 1969 and a comparably large set of instances from other countries. Those 109 articles were supplemented by 30 others found in other ways but not meeting those search criteria (e.g., because the information on rescheduling was a minor part of a more general article). FINDINGS: Findings are reported for many outcomes and with diverse measures over different timelines, making standardization of outcomes difficult. For more than half of the events for which quantitative outcomes were reported, there were declines in use-related measures by at least 40 percent. It is common for there to be reports of increases in indicators pertaining to other substances, sometimes more dangerous but sometimes less dangerous; overall, substitution appears to occur, but be partial. CONCLUSION: Scheduling and up-scheduling can - though does not always - have substantial effects on a range of outcomes. Substitution to other substances is a possibility and so should be anticipated.