Cost–benefit analysis of partnership working between fire and rescue and health services across England and Wales during the COVID-19 pandemic

Abstract

ObjectivesFire and rescue services undertook a range of additional activities to support the National Health Service (NHS) in managing extreme service demand during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aims to examine the cost–benefit of partnership work between fire and rescue services and the NHS during the COVID-19 pandemic.SettingEngland and Wales.DesignA cost–benefit approach was used. Data relating to resources and outcomes was accessed from a National Data Portal commissioned by the National Fire Chiefs Council to record fire and rescue service responses throughout the pandemic. Literature-based economic estimates were applied to establish the potential cost–benefit of fire and rescue services undertaking support activities.ResultsFire and rescue services commonly undertook eight activities to support ambulance services and hospitals in three key areas: (1) driving ambulances, (2) provision of personal protective equipment for healthcare workers and (3) mass testing and mass vaccination. Benefits outweighed costs for all activities. Total costs were estimated at £93.26 million and total benefits were between £171.46 million and £1.10 billion.ConclusionsThis is the first economic evaluation of partnership working between fire and rescue and health services during a pandemic. Findings highlight the social and economic value of co-operation between fire and rescue services and the NHS and provides important evidence for informing public sector decisions regarding the allocation of resources in future public health crises.

Evaluating emergency service response to COVID‐19: A scoping review

“…Fire services in the UK also supported health services with conducting mass testing and mass vaccination. [30][31][32][33] In Sierra Leone, paramedics supported their health service with transporting Covid-19 samples to laboratories. 34 Intra-agency health teams, 35 and inter-agency teams comprised of representatives from across emergency services, government bodies, and military 32,33 were used to coordinate this partnership working.…”

“…Supporting partners was also highlighted as being beneficial for strengthening relationships and improving information sharing, which was important for understanding and responding to the changing risks presented by the Covid-19 outbreak. 24,[29][30][31][32][33][34][35] However, whilst most sources described support activities undertaken, very few sought to evaluate the effectiveness of undertaking these activities. One exception was an independent evaluation commissioned by the National Fire Chiefs Council (NFCC), which drew on qualitative interviews with Chief Fire Officers (CFOs) and key stakeholders, and quantitative data relating to service response.…”

“…In addition to describing the range and level of support UK fire services provided, this body of work identified mechanisms impacting this, including service size, resourcing of inter-agency coordination teams, and strength of pre-existing relationships. 30,31,33 ii) Staff wellbeing…”

“…Another key outcome noted as important for demonstrating the effectiveness of emergency service response to Covid-19 across six sources was staff wellbeing. Across emergency services in the UK, USA, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, and Solomon Islands, 25,27,[29][30][31]33 concerns were raised for the impact of Covid-19 on staff wellbeing and steps that were being taken to manage this.…”

“…However, the outcomes of this negotiating process were mixed, leading to lengthy delays that were ill-suited to the dynamic context. 30,31,33,37 vi) Government guidelines Six sources highlighted the impact that government guidelines had on how effectively emergency services responded to the Covid-19 outbreak. Across 27 countries, public health restrictions implemented by governments predominantly included lockdowns, working from home, social distancing, and mask wearing.…”