Sri Lanka’s COVID-19 response and maintaining health services: implications for future pandemics

Ravindra Prasan Rannan-Eliya,Azrah Ghaffoor,Sarasi Amarasinghe,Manage Dhanusha Nirmani,Nilmini Wijemunige,Sanjay Perera,Sarath Samarage,KCS Dalpatadu,Niroshani Wisidagama,Sachini Fonseka,Nalin Kumara,Ahthiga Selvaratnam,Thimani Dananjana
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-013286
IF: 8.056
2024-01-01
BMJ Global Health
Abstract:This study examines how Sri Lanka, a lower-middle income country, managed its COVID-19 response and maintained health services. It draws on an extensive document review, key informant interviews and a national survey of public experience and opinion to assess what Sri Lanka did, its effectiveness and why. Owing to a strong health system and luck, Sri Lanka stopped the first wave of COVID-19 infections, and it adopted a ‘Zero-COVID’ approach with the explicit goal of stopping outbreaks. This was initially effective. Outbreaks reduced healthcare use, but with minimal impact on health outcomes. But from end-2020, Sri Lanka switched its approach to tolerating transmission and mitigation. It took proactive actions to maintain healthcare access, and it pursued a COVID-19 vaccination effort that was successful in covering its adult population rapidly and with minimal disparities. Despite this, widespread transmission during 2021–2022 disrupted health services through the pressure on health facilities of patients with COVID-19 and infection of healthcare workers, and because COVID-19 anxiety discouraged patients from seeking healthcare. This led to substantial mortality and more than 30 000 excess deaths by 2022. We find that Sri Lanka abandoned its initially successful approach, because it failed to understand that its chosen strategy required symptomatic PCR testing in primary care. Failure to invest in testing was compounded by groupthink and a medical culture averse to testing. Sri Lanka’s experience confirms that strong public health capacities, robust healthcare systems and intersectoral action are critical for pandemic response. It shows that civilian–military collaboration can be beneficial but contested, and that lack of fiscal space will undermine any response. It also demonstrates that pandemic preparedness cannot guarantee a successful pandemic response. Policy and research must pay more attention to improving decision-making processes when faced with pandemics involving novel pathogens, rapid spread, and substantial scientific uncertainty.
public, environmental & occupational health
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
This paper attempts to explore the practices and effects of Sri Lanka, as a lower - middle - income country, in responding to the COVID - 19 pandemic and maintaining medical services. Specifically, the study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of Sri Lanka's "Zero - COVID" strategy adopted in the early stage of the pandemic and why the country finally abandoned this strategy. In addition, the study also analyzes the impact of the pandemic on medical services, including the changes in the accessibility and utilization of medical services during the pandemic, and the specific impacts of these changes on health outcomes. Through a comprehensive literature review, key informant interviews, and a national public opinion survey, the research team attempts to comprehensively understand Sri Lanka's anti - pandemic measures and their effectiveness from multiple perspectives and extract implications for future pandemic responses from them. The main contributions of the study are: - Provide specific evidence on how a lower - middle - income country can utilize its strong health system to mitigate the impact of COVID - 19 on its medical services and medical accessibility. - Reveal the reasons why Sri Lanka successfully implemented the "Zero - COVID" strategy but failed to sustain it, especially the failure to recognize the crucial role of symptom testing in this strategy. - Emphasize the importance of public health capacity, a robust medical service system, and cross - sectoral actions for pandemic response, while also pointing out the complexity of civilian - military cooperation and the negative impact of insufficient fiscal space on the overall response capacity. These findings are not only of great significance for Sri Lanka's future pandemic preparation and response but also provide valuable lessons for other countries facing similar challenges.