Non-pharmaceutical interventions to combat COVID-19 in the Americas described through daily sub-national data.

This dataset covers national and subnational non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI) to combat the COVID-19 pandemic in the Americas. Prior to the development of a vaccine, NPI were governments' primary tools to mitigate the spread of COVID-19. Variation in subnational responses to COVID-19 is high and is salient for health outcomes. This dataset captures governments' dynamic, varied NPI to combat COVID-19 for 80% of Latin America's population from each country's first case through December 2021. These daily data encompass all national and subnational units in Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, and Peru. The dataset includes individual and aggregate indices of nine NPI: school closures, work suspensions, public event cancellations, public transport suspensions, information campaigns, local travel restrictions, international travel controls, stay-at-home orders, and restrictions on the size of gatherings. We also collected data on mask mandates as a separate indicator. Local country-teams drew from multiple data sources, resulting in high-quality, reliable data. The dataset thus allows for consistent, meaningful comparisons of NPI within and across countries during the pandemic.

Strengthening Health Systems To Face Pandemics: Subnational Policy Responses To COVID-19 In Latin America.

Nonpharmaceutical interventions such as stay-at-home orders continue to be the main policy response to the COVID-19 pandemic in countries with limited or slow vaccine rollout. Often, nonpharmaceutical interventions are managed or implemented at the subnational level, yet little information exists on within-country variation in nonpharmaceutical intervention policies. We focused on Latin America, a COVID-19 epicenter, and collected and analyzed daily subnational data on public health measures in Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, and Peru to compare within- and across-country nonpharmaceutical interventions. We showed high heterogeneity in the adoption of these interventions at the subnational level in Brazil and Mexico; consistent national guidelines with subnational heterogeneity in Argentina and Colombia; and homogeneous policies guided by centralized national policies in Bolivia, Chile, and Peru. Our results point to the role of subnational policies and governments in responding to health crises. We found that subnational responses cannot replace coordinated national policy. Our findings imply that governments should focus on evidence-based national policies while coordinating with subnational governments to tailor local responses to changing local conditions.

A partisan pandemic: state government public health policies to combat COVID-19 in Brazil.

INTRODUCTION: To present an analysis of the Brazilian health system and subnational (state) variation in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, based on 10 non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We collected daily information on implementation of 10 NPI designed to inform the public of health risks and promote distancing and mask use at the national level for eight countries across the Americas. We then analyse the adoption of the 10 policies across Brazil's 27 states over time, individually and using a composite index. We draw on this index to assess the timeliness and rigour of NPI implementation across the country, from the date of the first case, 26 February 2020. We also compile Google data on population mobility by state to describe changes in mobility throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: Brazil's national NPI response was the least stringent among countries analysed. In the absence of a unified federal response to the pandemic, Brazilian state policy implementation was neither homogenous nor synchronised. The median NPI was no stay-at-home order, a recommendation to wear masks in public space but not a requirement, a full school closure and partial restrictions on businesses, public transportation, intrastate travel, interstate travel and international travel. These restrictions were implemented 45 days after the first case in each state, on average. Rondônia implemented the earliest and most rigorous policies, with school closures, business closures, information campaigns and restrictions on movement 24 days after the first case; Mato Grosso do Sul had the fewest, least stringent restrictions on movement, business operations and no mask recommendation. CONCLUSIONS: The study identifies wide variation in national-level NPI responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Our focus on Brazil identifies subsequent variability in how and when states implemented NPI to contain COVID-19. States' NPIs and their scores on the composite policy index both align with the governors' political affiliations: opposition governors implemented earlier, more stringent sanitary measures than those supporting the Bolsonaro administration. A strong, unified national response to a pandemic is essential for keeping the population safe and disease-free, both at the outset of an outbreak and as communities begin to reopen. This national response should be aligned with state and municipal implementation of NPI, which we show is not the case in Brazil.