English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This study aimed to descript the Belgian COVID-19 responses process according to the WHO's (World Health Organization) Health Emergency and Disaster Risk Management Framework (Health EDRM Framework) and to present the measures taken and epidemic impact in the different phases of COVID-19 in Belgium. The WHO's EDRM Framework was used for reviewing the Belgian Public health emergency preparedness and responses in the context of COVID-19. Information on the measures taken was collected through the literature review including all government's communication, reports, and scientific papers. All epidemic data were extracted from a national open database managed and published by the Sciensano. Additionally, two authors closely followed the Belgian situation since the beginning of the pandemic and updated the data every day. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the anti-epidemic strategy was mainly to avoid medical resources exceeding the upper limit. Belgium issued a series of emergency decrees to limit the spread of the virus. An existing structure of "federal-region-municipal" as the framework of public health emergency preparedness and response was adapted. The emergency response process in Belgium was divided into four phases: information-evaluation-coordination-decision-making at the region level and the final decision-making at the federal level. Belgium also implemented a phased plan in the process of setting up and lifting the lockdown. However, it was vulnerable in early response, due to the shortage of medical equipment supplies in general, and more particularly for the long term care facilities (LTCFs). Belgium has achieved an intensive cooperation between stakeholders based on an existing multisectoral emergency organization framework. Legislation, medical insurance, and good communication also played a role in limiting the spread of viruses. However, the authorities underestimated the risk of an epidemic and did not take quarantine measures among people suspected affected by SARS-COV-2 in the early stages, resulting in insufficient medical equipment supply and a large number of deaths in the LTCF. The implementation of the lockdown measure in Belgium also encountered obstacles. The lockdown and its exit strategy were both closely related to the pandemic situation and social and economic life. The authorities should strengthen information management, improve the public awareness of the measures, and find out the balance points between the social and economic life and infection control measures.

Preparedness and Responses Faced during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Belgium: An Observational Study and Using the National Open Data