COVID-19 pandemic in Finland – Preliminary analysis on health system response and economic consequences

Tiirinki, Hanna; Tynkkynen, Liina‐Kaisa; Markus, Sovala; Atkins, Salla; Koivusalo, Meri; Rautiainen, Pauli; Jormanainen, Vesa; Keskimäki, Ilmo

doi:10.1016/j.hlpt.2020.08.005

Cited by 102 publications

(101 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…International flight connectivity has largely been responsible for spreading cases to locations around the world, later igniting community transmission and fostering larger outbreaks. Finland had the first case in the Nordic region, detected on January 29 in a tourist from China [ 9 ]. Community transmission did not occur, and Finland reacted quickly starting to ban travel from high-risk regions earlier than neighbours ( Supplemental Figure 1 ), which, in tandem with a comparatively high rate of testing, may have contributed to limiting their burden of overall COVID-19 infections and mortality from February to July.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of COVID-19 epidemiological indicators in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Finland

Yarmol-Matusiak

Cipriano

Stranges

2021

Scand J Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims: To compare the early impact of COVID-19 infections and mortality from February to July 2020 across the Nordic nations of Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Finland through available public data sources and conduct a descriptive analysis of the potential factors that drove different epidemiological outcomes, with a focus on Sweden’s response. Methods: COVID-19 cases, deaths, tests, case age distribution, and the difference between 2020 all-cause mortality and the average mortality of the previous 5 years were compared across nations. Patterns in cell phone mobility data, testing strategies, and seniors’ care home deaths were also compared. Data for each nation were based on publicly available sources as of July 31, 2020. Results: Compared with its Nordic peers, Sweden had a higher incidence rate across all ages, a higher COVID-19-related death rate only partially explained by population demographics, a higher death rate in seniors’ care, and higher all-cause mortality. Sweden had approximately half as much mobility change as its Nordic neighbours until April and followed similar rates as its neighbours from April to July. Denmark led its Nordic peers in testing rates, while Sweden had the highest cumulative test-positivity rate continuously from mid-March. Conclusions: COVID-19 pushed Sweden’s health system to its capacity, exposed systemic weaknesses in the seniors’ care system, and revealed challenges with implementing effective contact tracing and testing strategies while experiencing a high case burden. Looser government restrictions at the beginning of the outbreak are likely to have played a role in the impact of COVID-19 in Sweden. In an effort to improve epidemic control, Sweden has increased testing rates, implemented more restrictive prevention measures, and increased their intensive care unit bed capacity.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of COVID-19 epidemiological indicators in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Finland

Yarmol-Matusiak

Cipriano

Stranges

2021

Scand J Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to earlier reports, Finnish workers’ mental health has not decreased dramatically due to the COVID-19 pandemic [ 33 ]. This could be an indication of the overall COVID-19 situation in Finland, which has been among the best in the world [ 65 ]. Finland is a very sustainable and stable society where workers’ rights and wellbeing are guaranteed, perhaps better than in some other countries [ 66 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

COVID-19 Anxiety—A Longitudinal Survey Study of Psychological and Situational Risks among Finnish Workers

Savolainen

Oksa

Savela

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The COVID-19 crisis has changed the conditions of many all over the globe. One negative consequence of the ongoing pandemic is anxiety brought about by uncertainty and the COVID-19 disease. Increased anxiety is a potential risk factor for wellbeing at work. This study investigated psychological, situational, and socio-demographic predictors of COVID-19 anxiety using longitudinal data. Methods: A nationally representative sample of Finnish workers (N = 1308) was collected before and during the COVID-19 crisis. Eighty percent of the participants responded to the follow-up study (N = 1044). COVID-19 anxiety was measured with a modified Spielberger State–Trait Anxiety Inventory. Psychological and situational predictors included perceived loneliness, psychological distress, technostress, personality, social support received from the work community, and remote working. A number of socio-demographic factors were also investigated. Results: Perceived loneliness, psychological distress, technostress, and neuroticism were identified as robust psychological predictors of COVID-19 anxiety. Increase in psychological distress and technostress during the COVID-19 crisis predicted higher COVID-19 anxiety. A recent change in their field of work and decreased social support from work communities predicted COVID-19 anxiety. Women and young people experienced higher anxiety. Conclusions: Different factors explain workers’ COVID-19 anxiety. Increased anxiety can disrupt wellbeing at work, emphasizing the organizations’ role in maintaining an inclusive and caring work culture and providing technical and psychological support to workers during crisis.

show abstract

“…Our findings show that Finnish respondents have the most trust in their Government and medical care, which coincides with European data of having the highest trust in the political and legal system in Europe [ 28 ]. Maybe this has been the reason for the successful Finnish coronavirus strategy [ 29 ], and for having the lowest rate of cumulative cases of Covid-19, 1009.5, and cumulative deaths, 13.3 (per 100,000 population) (2 March 2021 [ 30 ]), in comparison with the rest of the European countries involved in our study: Latvia, 4606.8/86.6; Bulgaria, 3565.5/146.9; Romania, 3764.3/95.6; Poland, 4470.2/114.6; UK, 6314.0/185.8; Sweden, 6405.4/125.9; the Netherlands, 6252.5/89.7; Belgium, 6532.2/187.2; Czech Republic, 11,543.7/190.0 [ 30 ]. Actually, India has the lowest rate of cumulative cases of Covid-19, 828.5, and cumulative deaths, 11.7 (per 100,000 population), which is not surprising given that Indian and Finnish respondents reported the highest average compliance (80%) with all measures ( Table S4, Supplementary Materials, p. 5 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceived Effectiveness, Restrictiveness, and Compliance with Containment Measures against the Covid-19 Pandemic: An International Comparative Study in 11 Countries

Georgieva

Lantta

Lickiewicz

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

National governments took action to delay the transmission of the coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) by implementing different containment measures. We developed an online survey that included 44 different containment measures. We aimed to assess how effective citizens perceive these measures, which measures are perceived as violation of citizens’ personal freedoms, which opinions and demographic factors have an effect on compliance with the measures, and what governments can do to most effectively improve citizens’ compliance. The survey was disseminated in 11 countries: UK, Belgium, Netherlands, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Finland, India, Latvia, Poland, Romania, and Sweden. We acquired 9543 unique responses. Our findings show significant differences across countries in perceived effectiveness, restrictiveness, and compliance. Governments that suffer low levels of trust should put more effort into persuading citizens, especially men, in the effectiveness of the proposed measures. They should provide financial compensation to citizens who have lost their job or income due to the containment measures to improve measure compliance. Policymakers should implement the least restrictive and most effective public health measures first during pandemic emergencies instead of implementing a combination of many restrictive measures, which has the opposite effect on citizens’ adherence and undermines human rights.

show abstract

COVID-19 pandemic in Finland – Preliminary analysis on health system response and economic consequences

Cited by 102 publications

References 4 publications

A comparison of COVID-19 epidemiological indicators in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Finland

A comparison of COVID-19 epidemiological indicators in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Finland

COVID-19 Anxiety—A Longitudinal Survey Study of Psychological and Situational Risks among Finnish Workers

Perceived Effectiveness, Restrictiveness, and Compliance with Containment Measures against the Covid-19 Pandemic: An International Comparative Study in 11 Countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About