• 925.352.9462
    • info@iahc.com
    • Home
    • About Us
    • White Papers
IAHC
    Root causes of high costs (14)
    Redesign of clinical processes (2)
    Cost-saving technologies (2)
    Organizational changes (1)
    Strategic repositioning (1)
    Changes in health care work force (1)
    Robust financial systems (1)
    World-class business processes (1)
    Consumer engagement (1)
    Realigned incentives (1)
    Government's role (2)
    Others (3)

The Institute for Affordable Health Care (IAHC)

Cutting costs through education, networking & innovation

 
Featured

Some Good News about COVID-19 (Updated 8/20)

COVID-19 is a cruel disease.  It preys on the old and vulnerable, while most young and healthy people can shrug it off.  But the virus is also unpredictable.  Youth is no guarantee, and young and middle-aged people die, too, even if it’s rare.  And, COVID is a lonely way to die, in an isolation ward, hooked up to a respirator, separated from family and friends. Over the past five and a half months, 170,000 people in the U.S. have died, and millions of family members and friends have been shattered by their deaths.  It’s no wonder we are afraid of COVID-19 – either catching it ourselves or giving it to friends or loved ones.  It’s no wonder many of us aren’t shopping at stores or planning vacations.  Or that we are short-tempered when we see people being careless about social distancing or masking.

The Good News

However, there is growing evidence that we may have turned the corner, and that, with care, we will see the virus recede over the next couple of months.  This is not true for all parts of the country, but it is likely true for most.  The virus may resurge in the fall, of course; no one knows for certain.  But some parts of the country may have reached herd immunity (e.g., New York City), and most of the rest of the country is headed in the right direction.

This assessment is based on the trend of COVID-19 hospitalizations.  Hospitalizations are the best indicator of the severity of the pandemic, because they are not confounded by testing bias and are highly correlated with COVID-19 deaths two weeks later. Despite the uptick in cases in July in the South, the pandemic’s severity is now much less than in late March and early April.  The following chart shows hospitalization trends for six states and the US overall for the last four and a half months.

In April and early May, New York, New Jersey [not shown], and the District of Columbia had the highest levels of COVID-19 hospitalizations on a per capita basis.  Texas, Arizona, Florida, and other southern states surged in June and July, although their hospitalization rates never approached the levels of New York, New Jersey, or DC.  By late July, hospitalization rates in these states began trending down again and are now 42-66% below their peaks.  Meanwhile, COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths reached new lows in New York, with only 3 deaths recorded on August 3.

A similar pattern is evident in the rate of positive tests, as shown in this chart from Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center, although this measure is confounded by rapid growth in the number of tests we are doing.

These charts probably surprised you.  The media would have you believe that COVID-19 is an out-of-control epidemic that is engulfing the country.  As the New York Times put it a week ago, “…the coronavirus caseloads continued their brutal rise in the South and West.”  This week, Mayor de Blasio of New York City ordered vehicles from 34 states and Puerto Rico to be stopped at bridges and tunnels into Manhattan to enforce a 14-day quarantine.  (This is a little ironic, since none of the states have had outbreaks nearly as severe as New York’s initial outbreak.)

90%+ of the media are Democrats, and reporting on the virus is hopelessly conflicted because of their desire to drive President Trump out of office.  To bolster their case, they misuse statistics in order to keep everyone frightened.  For example:

  • Most report cumulative statistics, which are always increasing. We hear a lot more about “confirmed cases,” which are cumulative and never go down, than “new cases.”
  • Case counts, both new and confirmed, are confounded by our rapidly expanding testing program. The more tests we do, the more confirmed cases we will find, even if the virus is stable or shrinking.
  • As always, the media reports on the hardest hit areas, ignoring what is going on in the rest of the country.

Democrats and the media attribute the rise in cases in Southern states to irresponsible behavior by red state “deplorables,” aided and abetted by President Trump and Republican governors who have failed to “show leadership” in keeping businesses shut down and ordering everyone in the country to wear masks in public.

There is an alternative explanation – namely, that this is the normal course of the virus across a large, diverse, and mobile country and that the initial spurts we experienced in New York, Detroit, New Orleans, etc., were outliers due to our delayed response to the seriousness of the epidemic. Back in mid-March, The New York Times published state-level projections for the pandemic under different “lockdown” assumptions that were developed by a team of epidemiologists from Columbia’s Mailman School of Public Health.  This study, which was based on county-level data, made the following projections for New York, Arizona, California, Florida, Texas and Alabama:

In their words, “The coasts are likely to get hit early, but the infection rate is much lower and later if control measures are imposed… Counties in the country’s interior will mostly see infection rates peak later.”

These projections fit the actual experience of the states fairly well.  New York’s cases peaked earlier than projected in the “no controls” case, probably partly because of the decision to discharge sick COVID patients to nursing homes.  Southern states peaked about a month later than projected in the “some control measures” case, but this may have been because they implemented more severe controls than the ones the researchers modeled.

An important general point of the Columbia study is that control measures flatten the curve, but they also push the peak of the epidemic later.  California, which has been one of the most controlled states in the country, kept its curve relatively flat for several months.  But the virus hasn’t gone away, and California is one of the states that has seen a recent resurgence.  Another example is Florida, which took aggressive early action to lock down nursing homes and other long-term care facilities.  These actions succeeded in flattening the curve for 2-3 months.  Unfortunately, however, deaths in Florida’s nursing homes are now rising.  As one nursing home operator explained, “We have essentially set up the closest thing to a virtual COVID wall, but what you can’t control is friends and family of caregivers.” 

As awful as COVID-19 can be for vulnerable people, the trajectory of the virus is reason to hope that this epidemic may be winding down.  Clearly, we are not out of the woods, and careless behavior could spark a resurgence.  But if we continue to take reasonable precautions, we have probably seen the worst of it, vaccine or no vaccine.  Then, all we will have to deal with is the economic and social fallout, which has been devastating.

One response to “Some Good News about COVID-19 (Updated 8/20)”

  1. Richard E. Ward says:
    August 17, 2020 at 6:14 am

    At the risk of personification of the COVID-19 virus, herd immunity is achieved when the prevalence of immunity in the population — either by virtue of recovering from prior COVID-19 infections or receiving an effective vaccine — is sufficiently high as to make it sufficiently difficult for the virus in one infected person to spread to an average of one or more additional people. The difficulty of the virus in one infected person to spread to another person is partly due to characteristics of the virus (which can change over time due to mutation), partly due to the performance of available vaccines and population immunization initiatives (both of which can change over time), and partly due to the behaviors of people and organizations — which can change drastically over time. So herd immunity is not a constant, but rather a description of a state in a dynamic system.

    So, when we observe declining hospitalization rates in a city, state or country after an initial surge of case incidence rates, it is important to understand that this is partly (mostly?) the outcome of big behavior changes in individuals and influenced somewhat by policy changes by organizations. People see bad things happening, and their fear motivates cautious behaviors and makes them willing to support costly or inconvenient policy changes. Some of those behavior and policy changes may be sustainable, but I suspect that most are not. Fear subsides. Attention spans are exceeded. The economic harms start to deplete available savings. Therefore, we can assume that over time, without a broadly-accepted, effective vaccine, the virus will again have less difficulty finding new victims, and we can expect additional waves. That mathematical and behavioral economic reality has nothing to do with partisan politics. Therefore, particularly if early promising results from vaccine development programs leads to disappointing large scale trail results (which has happened in the past), or if anti-vax sentiment is strong, we will be stuck with a longer slog, and we’ll need to use our best thinking and our best politics to optimize. Sorry to be curmudgeonly.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CAPTCHA Image
Refresh Image

*

 

  • 01/19/2021
  • dganderson
  • 08/06/2020

 

David G. Anderson, Ph.D., Executive Director

David G. Anderson, IAHC's Executive Director, has been a partner and managing director of three health care strategy consulting firms - APM, CSC Healthcare (which acquired APM), and BDC Advisors, LLC, where he serves as Director of Planning and Development.  Over 25 years, Dave has consulted with many of the largest health systems, academic medical centers, health insurers, and medical groups in the country, providing expertise in strategic planning, program development, organizational transformation, mergers, acquisitions, and a host of other top-management issues.  He has also been Chief Operating Officer of a health care services provider, a faculty member at the MIT Sloan School of Management, and an engagement manager at McKinsey & Company.   While at McKinsey, he managed the research for the business best-seller In Search of Excellence, by Tom Peters and Bob Waterman.  Dave holds MBA and PhD degrees from Stanford's Graduate School of Business and a BS from Yale University.  He is the author of numerous papers on strategic planning, product development, cost management, ambulatory care, organizational development, and other topics of concern to health care executives.

Copyright THE INSTITUTE FOR AFFORDABLE HEALTHCARE 2014. All Rights Reserved.
Site Designed by Planeteria Web Design

  •  Home  | 
  •  About Us  | 
  •  White Papers  | 

GET IN TOUCH

USE OUR CONTACT FORM

CONTACT US

TEL. 925.352.9462
FAX 775.831.1190

EMAIL US

INFO@IAHC.COM