The critical review of the crisis of COVID-19 Pandemic helps to investigate the impact of and the consequences of this crisis which arose in late of the year 2019 and rapidly increased throughout the world in the year of 2020. This crisis had been caused by the coronavirus, particularly for the SARS-Cov2. This is extremely transmissible and spreads acute respiratory illness among humans. This crucial crisis needs effective intervention to tackle this and this study will help to elaborate the explanation of this crisis. These important general well-being interventions prompted unpreventable financial and social disturbance. Coronavirus tried public wellbeing outlines and supply chains. The pandemic recession expanded unemployment and business terminations. Individuals experienced social disengagement, responsive wellness challenges, and postponed clinical deliberation. Specialists competed to foster antibodies and medicines.
Explanation of the Crisis
This crisis has spread by this kind of transmission among human beings. The rate of the cases increased due to the high mortality rates, the high hospitalization, and the deficiency of the immunity of the population. The rate of mortality has been increasing rapidly because of the late innovation of effective vaccine systems. The invention of the vaccine system was very late in early 2020. The crisis spread terribly because of the lockdown employed by the governments, the restriction of transportation, and the social distancing that was taken to reduce the speed of the spread. The innovation allowed new types of remote work and business. Local gatherings accumulated to help weak populaces. The multi-layered Coronavirus emergency features the interconnectedness of cultures of the society and the condition for vital details and social safety.
Discussion
The Crisis
Outlining of information
The Coronavirus pandemic had a significant effect in the UK starting in mid-2020. The novel coronavirus extent quickly given the UK's interconnectivity and density of the population. By the late of the month march of 2020, the UK government forced a lockdown to control the epidemic nationwide (Matuschek et al. 2020). Coronavirus puts an enormous burden on the NHS or the national health services. Medical clinics threatened overflows of patients needing respiratory help, but there were inadequate and deteriorated care capacities in those clinics. Deficiencies of ventilators, the workers of the health sectors, and the effective protective equipment for dealing with this crisis. The NHS delayed the care of the non-urgent patient's concerns to emphasize the Coronavirus, which left numerous patients untreated. The emergency featured underinvestment and deficient limit of the patient in the well-being framework.
Outlining of the information of the chosen crisis
The impact was disparate on the population who are susceptible or the immunologically weak. The older ones were at a higher risk of death and hospitalization which represents about 85% of the mortality rate (Velikorossov et al. 2021). The minorities experienced a massive infection rate and fatality because of the work-related gatherings and the social connectedness. Families who are in a state of low financial status and live in crowded places were also experience higher chances of infection and adverse consequences. The financial and social effects initiated by the restrictions in the social isolation. Expected business terminations increased unemployment by more than 10% by June 2020. The rate of GDP declined rapidly due to this crisis nationwide which indicates the unfavorable recession rate. The usage of food banks had largely lowered and the families who were running those suffered a huge loss at that time (Berardi et al. 2020). The crisis had affected the allover of the age group differently. The children who were of students of the school and college had experienced enormous mental pressure due to the closings of their education sectors. This vastly affected their education system and affected them in lack of knowledge.
Figure 1: The impact on the different communities
Justification of the Chosen Crisis
The cause of the chosen crisis is to evaluate the effectiveness and the adverse effects to gain knowledge from this situation (Reyes-Chua et al. 2020). Any kind of crisis assists human beings in tackling the same kind of situation more effectively. The reason for choosing the crisis is another reason to make the analysis of the reduction of the number of cases and how to create an effective way of dealing with the adverse effects of this crisis. The UK's insight during the pandemic is significant to the complications faced by many developing countries. Despite the NHS's universal coverage, a period of severe actions prior to the crisis had weakened the public health infrastructure and limited capacity for intensive care, representing the nation unprepared for a health emergency of this extent (Alonazi, 2020). The emergency disclosed important well-being abnormalities and economic, especially influencing the greatest vulnerable.
Relatable evidence for support
The crisis of covid 19 in the United Kingdom has been broadly acknowledged, and there is much evidence to emphasize the influence and the severity of this pandemic throughout the world. The large number of affirmed cases and fatalities fills in as an obvious indication of the emergency's extent. In January 2022, the UK had revealed 10 million confirmed Coronavirus cases and in excess of 150,000 passing. These records highlight the broad transmission and deadly outcomes of the contamination (Hossain et al. 2022). Hospitalization rates and stress on medical services frameworks additionally give the evidence of the emergency. In the UK, intensive care units reached or exceeded their capacity during peak times, putting remarkable pressure on hospitals. From these records, it has been admitted that there was a wide transmission of the disease and its extreme outcomes. The responses of the Government and general wellbeing measures include the evidence of this support. The UK effected different limitations and lockdowns at various phases of the pandemic to control the spread of the contamination. The impact on the economy, which includes evidence of job losses, business closures, and economic recessions, further underscores the crisis (De Villiers et al. 2020). The UK experienced critical financial complications, with areas like sociability, travel, and marketing being especially which effect hardly. Government support agendas and economic motivations help to guide to moderate the financial repercussions, which gives other evidence of the emergency's extensive results.
The Intervention
The evidence of the practice and uses of healthcare development
The evidence can be collected from the various articles that gather a lot of information about this crisis and the way of handling this (Mirabelli et al. 2020). The articles are collected for gathering the proper information and the affected of the crisis in a detailed way of arranging. The article inspects the UK government's accounting and responsibility works during the Coronavirus pandemic through a Foucauldian focal argument. It settles that the government operated the facts and used verbal tactics to avoid accountability (Hassankhani et al. 2021). For instance, the public specialists asserted they noticed logical guidance, but the evidence shows that the science was diminished in navigation. The public authority additionally worried about realities by not distributing intricacies on PPE contracts and specifically presenting measurements. The practices of the keeping recording determined "the excessive deaths” in a way that prohibited Coronavirus mortalities. The public authority outlined the approach as following "the science," while not uncovering abnormalities. They introduced lockdown enabling as a reaction to public exhaustion, not hidden tensions. The government concealed deficiencies in preparedness, policy reversals, and the effects of promoting.
Figure 2: The prevention of Covid 19
The article examines how UK historical centers carefully adjusted displays during the beginning phase of Coronavirus lockdowns. The article represents the many historical places where public gatherings frequently experienced the problem during the time of lockdown. The implementation consists of 3D virtual tours, contact with online collections, content from social media, and improved reality (de Carvalho et al. 2021). It can be clarified by giving evidence from the British Museum which provides the virtual exhibition and the sharing of the information from the digital media. The museum based on the scientific exhibitions provides videos for families to observe the show virtually. These articles have drawn on the websites of the 60 UK museums, the digital media, and the distributed reviews of them. The information showed expanded internet-based guests, demonstrating compact community attention. However, electronic options couldn't completely succeed face to face-to-face visits. The article concludes that exhibition galleries ought to keep creating on the initiatives presented digitally while recognizing innovation limits. Digital staff training, and national digital access campaigns, are among the recommendations. The investigation proves galleries' adaptable reactions, public commitment, and the worth of digitization while recognizing the essentialness of a substantial inheritance.
Figure 3: The rate of unemployment during lockdown
The article represents the perception of the UK public of information media's function during the Coronavirus pandemic (Dupont et al. 2020). It inducements on a detailed review of more than adults in the number of 3,600 UK accompanied in April 2020. Key discoveries show most respondents acknowledged news media for assisting them with the preservation themselves and continue informed. 79% said news media assisted them with answering properly to the emergency. Over half of the residents can thoroughly follow Coronavirus news attentively. However, 36% of respondents thought that the news of the pandemic appeared to be worse than it was. Along with this, only 46% stated that news organizations were concerned about the public interest.
The article also states the health implications of the COVID pandemic which expresses the barriers and the effective recommendations. This represents that contradictory information, missing information, and doubtful information sharing challenged public trust and made the difficult reaction activities. This evidence of the article can be represented by sharing an example which was the contradictory guidance on the wearing of masks and the regenerating of all the locations confused the public by the WHO against the CDC. Due to authorities' lack of transparency, misinformation extends widely on social media (Jaffri and Jaffri, 2020). The article has drawn attention from public surveys, analysis of the content, and interviews of the experts to gather evidence of these problems.
Other evidence of the crisis has been collected from another article which represents the effective results accompanied by the world psychiatric association at the time of 2020 of the month of April. The surveys are collected data from specialists in psychology across the forty nations to analyze the effects of a pandemic. Key proof shows critical conflicts to mental medical care arrangement and heightening interest for administrators. The tele psychiatry can be extended but there are inequalities among the different countries that have also been represented in this paper. This has analyzed that in the time of pandemic mental illness has increased rapidly and the causes of this affected them in many areas (Gretzel et al. 2020). The authors presented the domestic violence that had arisen from this crisis that has also affected the mental trauma.
The previous crisis and its intervention
The 1918-19 flu pandemic gives significant demonstrations and illustrations that could illuminate Coronavirus response activities (Lee et al. 2020). Challenged with a novel and exceptionally deadly influenza strain, numerous urban societies comprised social isolation measures to slow the spread. Social isolation is effective against respiratory pandemics because it decreases mortality rates by up to 50% in affected cities in the United States. It was presented in the same way in the year of 1918 that social distancing is an effective way to spread the transmission of the virus among the population. This was very evident at that time because then the vaccines were not available to tackle the contagious disease. Applying like the covid 19, closures of the education sectors, the recommendations about staying at home along with social isolation can reduce the rate of mortality at the time of the crucial time. These involvements need the time to innovate the vaccine and the effective medication to prevent the spread of the effects of it (Coccia, 2021). The pandemic that occurred in the year of 1918 helps to represent that pharmaceutical medication can limit the spread of the respiratory virus. These could effectively be done until the immunity of the human body gets activated.
Emphasize one intervention
Distancing in the Society measures ought to be held as a vital intervention to control impending viral respiratory diseases. By lessening close contact in public gatherings, distancing in society helps to control transmission when antibodies do not yet exist in the environment. This intervention decreases stress on medical services workers while protecting the weakest gatherings who are at the most prominent chance of serious illness and expiration, including the old and those with fundamental situations (Aziz et al. 2020). Social distancing policies should provide specific leadership for healthcare, school, workplace, and community settings to support integrated pandemic response. Organized social distancing strategies have the ability to preserve the operation of essential services while also gaining public support if they are developed in an obvious and consistent routine.
Critical Analysis of Intervention
Analysis based on the intervention
A detailed analysis of the impact of the COVID-19 intervention is important to discuss in this study, supported by data collected from the Internet and Google Scholar. To determine the effectiveness of the lockdown scenario, these measures included limiting the search area and searching for relevant research, here it is searched Google Scholar for "COVID-19. Lockdown impact" to assess how lockdown interventions affected the spread of infectious diseases. Relevant publications, such as model studies and epidemiologic data, were obtained. Demographics, interventions, comparisons, and outcomes were described using the PICO model, which provided a systematic approach to understanding the effectiveness of the lockdown program.
Narrowing of the search and the Identification of intervention
Focusing on research in the UK, economic and social responses to the treatment of COVID-19 were examined through a vast area of Internet surveys. The data focuses on the connection between economic stability and public health measures, providing insights into broader social consequences (Al Thobaity et al. 2020). Focusing on research on the temporal dimensions of interventions, a specific internet search was conducted to investigate the controversy surrounding the timing and duration of COVID-19 interventions. The PICO chart of appropriate populations, interventions, comparisons, and outcomes helped structure the study.
An online search was used to identify abnormalities in the implementation of lockdown rules and issues of unclear rules and inconsistent implementation were identified. Using Google Scholar and the Internet as primary sources, COVID-19 crisis interventions were thoroughly reviewed to ensure a comprehensive assessment of the effects of different strategies implemented during the unprecedented crisis of the day (Guillet and Chu, 2021). The research provided valuable insights into the effectiveness, controversies, and social implications of the measures.
Outlining of PICO Framework
PICO Element
Description
Population/Problem (P)
People in the covid 19 affected a vast area of demographic categories and health effects
Intervention (I)
Undertaking thorough COVID-19 vaccination programs that consider various types of vaccine
Comparison (C)
The people who are unvaccinated lack overall vaccination campaigns
Outcome (O)
Analyzation of the effect of the vaccination campaign on preventing the spread of COVID-19 transmission and strength in a range of demographics
The critical analysis of the crisis based on the COVID-19 pandemic explores the different areas to analysis briefly. The introductory part has elaborated the outlining of the crisis with an explanation of the cause of this. The discussion part of this essay has portrayed the many aspects including the outlining of the information and the impact on the healthcare services throughout the nation. This has also enabled to understand the reason for choosing this and the proper evidence to increase the knowledge about the crisis. The intervention from the evidence has also been gathered in this to present the proper guidance for future crisis and how to tackle them.
Struggling with university assignments?
We understand that university assignments can be challenging, but with our University Assignment Help, you can take the pressure off. Our team of experienced professionals is dedicated to providing expert-written, plagiarism-free papers. Whether you need help with research, writing, or formatting, we’ll ensure your assignments meet academic standards and are delivered on time, every time.
References
Journals
Al Thobaity, A. and Alshammari, F., 2020. Nurses on the frontline against the COVID-19 pandemic: an integrative review. Dubai medical journal, 3(3), pp.87-92.
Alonazi, W.B., 2020. The impact of emotional intelligence on job performance during COVID-19 crisis: A cross-sectional analysis. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, pp.749-757.
Aziz, S., Arabi, Y.M., Alhazzani, W., Evans, L., Citerio, G., Fischkoff, K., Salluh, J., Meyfroidt, G., Alshamsi, F., Oczkowski, S. and Azoulay, E., 2020. Managing ICU surge during the COVID-19 crisis: rapid guidelines. Intensive care medicine, 46, pp.1303-1325.
Berardi, A., Perinelli, D.R., Merchant, H.A., Bisharat, L., Basheti, I.A., Bonacucina, G., Cespi, M. and Palmieri, G.F., 2020. Hand sanitisers amid CoViD-19: A critical review of alcohol-based products on the market and formulation approaches to respond to increasing demand. International journal of pharmaceutics, 584, p.119431.
Coccia, M., 2021. High health expenditures and low exposure of population to air pollution as critical factors that can reduce fatality rate in COVID-19 pandemic crisis: a global analysis. Environmental Research, 199, p.111339.
de Carvalho, C.A., Viola, P.C.D.A.F. and Sperandio, N., 2021. How is Brazil facing the crisis of Food and Nutrition Security during the COVID-19 pandemic?. Public Health Nutrition, 24(3), pp.561-564.
De Villiers, C., Cerbone, D. and Van Zijl, W., 2020. The South African government's response to COVID-19. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 32(5), pp.797-811.
Dupont, C., Oberthür, S. and Von Homeyer, I., 2020. The Covid-19 crisis: a critical juncture for EU climate policy development?. Journal of European Integration, 42(8), pp.1095-1110.
Gretzel, U., Fuchs, M., Baggio, R., Hoepken, W., Law, R., Neidhardt, J., Pesonen, J., Zanker, M. and Xiang, Z., 2020. e-Tourism beyond COVID-19: a call for transformative research. Information Technology & Tourism, 22, pp.187-203.
Guillet, B.D. and Chu, A.M.C., 2021. Managing hotel revenue amid the COVID-19 crisis. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 33(2), pp.604-627.
Hassankhani, M., Alidadi, M., Sharifi, A. and Azhdari, A., 2021. Smart city and crisis management: Lessons for the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(15), p.7736.
Hossain, M.R., Akhter, F. and Sultana, M.M., 2022. SMEs in covid-19 crisis and combating strategies: a systematic literature review (SLR) and A case from emerging economy. Operations research perspectives, 9, p.100222.
Jaffri, A. and Jaffri, U.A., 2020. Post-Intensive care syndrome and COVID-19: crisis after a crisis?. Heart & Lung: The Journal of Cardiopulmonary and Acute Care, 49(6), pp.883-884.
Lee, S., Hwang, C. and Moon, M.J., 2020. Policy learning and crisis policy-making: Quadruple-loop learning and COVID-19 responses in South Korea. Policy and Society, 39(3), pp.363-381.
Matuschek, C., Moll, F., Fangerau, H., Fischer, J.C., Zänker, K., van Griensven, M., Schneider, M., Kindgen-Milles, D., Knoefel, W.T., Lichtenberg, A. and Tamaskovics, B., 2020. Face masks: benefits and risks during the COVID-19 crisis. European journal of medical research, 25, pp.1-8.
Mirabelli, M., Chiefari, E., Puccio, L., Foti, D.P. and Brunetti, A., 2020. Potential benefits and harms of novel antidiabetic drugs during COVID-19 crisis. International journal of environmental research and public health, 17(10), p.3664.
Reyes-Chua, E., Sibbaluca, B.G., Miranda, R.D., Palmario, G.B., Moreno, R.P. and Solon, J.P.T., 2020. The status of the implementation of the e-learning classroom in selected higher education institutions in region IV-A amidst the covid-19 crisis. Journal of Critical Reviews, 7(11), pp.253-258.
Velikorossov, V., Maksimov, M., Prodanova, N., Korechkov, Y., Starostin, S. and Rakauskienė, O.G., 2021. On the evaluation of the effectiveness of states' measures to overcome the COVID-19 crisis: statistics and common sense. International Journal of Applied Exercise Physiology. Mazandaran: Eurasian Exercise and Sport Science Association, 2021, vol. 10, iss. 1.
