Australia’s COVID research shows why a permanent ‘disease control centre’ is more urgent than ever

The long-awaited independent inquiry into Australia’s COVID response was released Todaywith lessons on how the nation can better prepare for future pandemics.

The 868-page report outlined nine guiding recommendations and 26 actions, including 19 to be implemented over the next twelve to eighteen months. These form the basis for preparing for future pandemics.

With an initial strong national solidarity, Australia moved quickly to close its national borders, the survey found. This bought crucial time, but Australia was not adequately prepared for a crisis of the magnitude of the COVID pandemic.

Australia’s response lacked strong central coordination and leadership. Communication about public health advice was often contradictory or not properly communicated to the most vulnerable groups. Public trust was further undermined by a lack of transparency in decision-making, such as disease modeling, that underpinned key public health responses.

In in retrospectThe study concluded that a full-fledged Australian Center for Disease Control (CDC) could have made a huge difference. In response, the federal government today committed $251 million to establish such a center in Canberra.

What has the research yielded?

1. Early rapid response and consensus helped keep us safe. As an inland country, Australia was able to close its borders and prepare for the ultimately inevitable population-wide spread of SARS CoV-2. But it was not prepared for pandemic-related quarantines.

2. Initially, communication was clear and consistent. This didn’t last long. Huge uncertainties, rapidly changing circumstances, divergent opinions among experts and the politicization of the response undermined communication strategies. Communication with various ethnic groups and vulnerable population groups was often not optimal. Going forward, misinformation and disinformation must be addressed by improving health literacy and proactive communication.

3. Our healthcare infrastructure was lacking and could not handle emergency power capacity, The survey found remarkable unity among health care workers. Aged care facilities were particularly vulnerable and had poor infection control practices. More broadly, there were supply chain issues and inadequate supplies of essential infection prevention and control equipment such as masks and gloves. Australia was unable to manufacture these and was left at the mercy of foreign suppliers.

4. Analyzing the virus’s genetic material and widespread testing have been critical to tracking viral evolution and spread. Pathogengenomics in New South Wales and Victoria for example, made accurate tracking possible of virus variants and local transmission. But there was poor data sharing between jurisdictions and limited national coordination to optimize data interpretation and response.

5. There was a lack of transparent, fact-based decision-making. Disease models that informed important decisions were opaque and not subject to critical examination or peer review.

6. Vulnerable populations, including children, have suffered disproportionately. The COVID-related school closures were particularly damaging because they disproportionately affected learning, socialization and development affected children from a lower socio-economic background. Strict social isolation also increased the risk of domestic violence, along with anxiety and other mental health consequences. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people were at higher risks due to service inequalities and social determinants of health.

7. Research is important and must be scalable quickly. Good surveillance systems for emerging infectious diseases and future pandemic threats must be in place. Patient specimens must be preserved so that we can quickly investigate disease mechanisms and develop essential diagnostic tests. The research recognized the need for Australia to develop its own vaccines and access to mRNA technology was recognized as an important measure for healthcare safety given the challenges in accessing vaccines.

8. Global solidarity and cooperation create a safer word for all.

The great disparity in access to COVID vaccines, major fault lines opened in international relations and continue to complicate the drafting of a global pandemic treaty.

9. Emerging diseases with a One Health focus should be recognized as a ‘permanent threat’. In our modern, interconnected world, with highly concentrated human and animal populations combined with stressed ecosystems, new diseases with pandemic potential will emerge at an unprecedented rate. This requires a global focus.

How can a CDC make a difference?

One of the key messages from the research is that the lack of strong, independent, central coordination has hampered our response to the pandemic.

Inadequate data flow between jurisdictions was a major shortcoming that limited the ability to formulate targeted responses. This is necessary to understand:

• transmission dynamics
• the vulnerabilities in people with a serious illness
• the circulating viral variants.

The study also highlighted the need to analyze data in near real-time.

Good data ensures evidence-based and transparent policy. This is a critical area for a future Australian CDC to address. The CDC will function as a ‘data hub’, with Canberra providing the ideal location to support a multi-jurisdictional ‘hub-and-spoke’ model.

Australia’s new CDC is expected to be launched by 2019 January 2026pending approval of the legislation. The ongoing challenge will be to ensure it delivers optimal long-term health benefits for all Australians.

This article is republished from The conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.