Nazrul Islam1, Dmitri A Jdanov2,3, Vladimir M Shkolnikov2,3, Kamlesh Khunti4,5, Ichiro Kawachi6, Martin White7, Sarah Lewington8,9, Ben Lacey8. 1. Clinical Trial Service Unit and Epidemiological Studies Unit (CTSU), Nuffield Department of Population Health, Big Data Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK nazrul.islam@ndph.ox.ac.uk. 2. Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany. 3. International Laboratory for Population and Health, National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russian Federation. 4. Diabetes Research Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK. 5. NIHR Applied Research Collaboration-East Midlands, Leicester General Hospital, Leicester, UK. 6. Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA. 7. MRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. 8. Clinical Trial Service Unit and Epidemiological Studies Unit (CTSU), Nuffield Department of Population Health, Big Data Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. 9. MRC Population Health Research Unit, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Since the emergence of SARS-CoV-2, health policy measures employed to minimise the
impact of the covid-19 pandemic have varied substantially across countries and
jurisdictions.1
2
3
4
5
6
7 These policy measures have affected many social and economic
determinants of health,8
9
10
11 including accessibility to
healthcare services.12
13
14
15 The overall impact of the pandemic and its
associated policy measures therefore have implications for mortality beyond deaths
with covid-19—the accuracy and completeness of which has been questioned in many
countries and jurisdictions.2
16Data on all cause mortality are considered more reliable indicators of the impact of
the covid-19 pandemic because they are less sensitive to coding errors, competing
risks, and the potential for misclassification in designating the cause of deaths,
and as such enable comparisons between countries.17
18
19
20
21 We have previously reported a large
difference between reported deaths with covid-19 and estimated excess deaths
associated with the covid-19 pandemic in 2020.22 Previous studies have used historical baseline mortality data over
the recent past to estimate the expected number of deaths in 2020 and provide the
basis for estimating excess deaths (observed minus expected deaths), which capture
both the direct (deaths with covid-19) and the indirect (deaths from other causes)
effects of the pandemic and associated policy measures.18
19
20
21
22 Although using excess
deaths has been considered the ideal method for measuring the impact of the
pandemic,15 this metric does not take
into account age at death. When people die at an older age, they lose fewer years of
remaining life.23
24 Analysis of life expectancy and years of life lost (YLL)
provide a more nuanced estimation of premature mortality at population level. Life
expectancy, a widely used metric of mortality, is an indication of how long on
average people can expect to survive if the age specific mortality rates of that
year remain constant for the remainder of their life.25
26 YLL takes into
account the age distributions of mortality by giving greater weights to deaths that
occur at younger ages.24 An important
difference exists between life expectancy and YLL. Whereas life expectancy is a
standardised measure based on a hypothetical life table cohort, YLL is calculated
from the numbers of deaths observed in real populations. Therefore, life expectancy
depends solely on mortality, and YLL (even after dividing by population size)
depends on both the mortality and the age structure of the population.Previous studies have reported the effects of the pandemic on reduction in life
expectancy in the United States,27
28 England and Wales,29 and Spain,26
largely based on partial data in 2020. Earlier studies have reported the YLL based
on deaths with covid-19 only.23
30
31
32 This method has several
limitations because deaths with covid-19 were reported to have varying degrees of
accuracy and incompleteness2
16
23; covid-19 mortality data are often not disaggregated by age and sex,
which are required for the calculation of YLL2; and the impact of the pandemic and its associated policy measures on
deaths from other causes are not captured.15
22 A recent study by Aburto
and colleagues examined changes in life expectancy between 2019 and 2020 in 29
developed countries and provided important information on differences between
countries, including the best and the worst performers.33 However, this study was based on preliminary death
statistics for reported countries and did not include data from Canada, Israel,
Latvia, Luxembourg, New Zealand, Russia, South Korea, and Taiwan. The study did not
report on the change in YLL either.Most earlier studies compared life expectancy or YLL in 2020 with that in 2019 or an
average of the most recent few years, which might lead to incorrect conclusions (see
supplementary file).In this study, we report the changes in life expectancy at birth and excess YLL from
all causes in 2020 by comparing the observed life expectancy and YLL in 2020 with
those that would be expected based on historical trends in 2005-19 in 37 high income
countries.
Methods
Study design and eligibility
This study is a time series analysis of annual data on all cause mortality
obtained from 37 upper-middle and high income countries with reliable, valid,
and complete mortality data between 2005 and 2020 disaggregated by age and
sex.
Source of data
We obtained data from the Human Mortality Database, in which mortality and
population data from authoritative national agencies are collated and
standardised. The database is maintained by the Department of Demography at the
University of California, Berkeley, US and the Max Planck Institute for
Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany.34
35 Mortality data for
2020 were obtained from the Short-term Mortality Fluctuations data series (a new
extension of the Human Mortality Database).36 For the purposes of this study, we required annual mortality data
to be disaggregated by age groups (<1, 1-4, 5-9, . . . 90-95, and ≥100) and
sex.Data for 2020 were available for 37 countries: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria,
Canada, Chile, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, England and Wales, Estonia,
Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Latvia,
Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Northern Ireland, Norway,
Poland, Portugal, Russia, Scotland, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain,
Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, and the US. Details on the source and the
methodology for collection and standardisation of data from each of these
countries or regions have been published previously.36
37
38 In many countries, age groups
originally available in Short-term Mortality Fluctuations data differed somewhat
from the required granular age scale in this study. In six countries (Canada,
Israel, Germany, New Zealand, South Korea, and the US) Short-term Mortality
Fluctuations data included relatively coarse age groups (see supplementary
file).
Statistical analysis
Calculation of life expectancy and YLL in 2020 and 2015
Whenever possible, we used annual estimates from the Human Mortality Database
based on official data (see supplementary file). Using the available data
series in the Human Mortality Database starting from 2005, we employed the
Lee-Carter model39 to extrapolate
annual death rates, which consequently serve as the input to estimate age
specific population exposures and expected death counts under the assumption
of zero migration. Expected age specific death rates were predicted
separately for men and women. We obtained expected death counts and
population exposures for both men and women by summing the data for each. We
used the forecasted population exposures and observed death counts from the
Short-term Mortality Fluctuations data series to calculate observed death
rates for countries where annual estimates for 2020 were not available from
the Human Mortality Database.Before calculating observed age specific death rates, we standardised the
death counts from Short-term Mortality Fluctuations according to the
International Organization for Standardization 8601-2004 guidelines36 and adjusted for incomplete weekly
death statistics in 2020. The age and sex specific adjustment coefficients
for incompleteness were calculated using the average annual ratio of the
Short-term Mortality Fluctuations data (ie, sum of weekly death counts) to
annual death counts during the past five years.In the absence of detailed mortality data by granular age groups, especially
at young ages (eg, <1, 1-4 years) and old ages (eg, 85-89, 90-94 years)
for 2020 in Short-term Mortality Fluctuations, we split aggregated age
groups using distribution of forecasted death counts from the Human
Mortality Database (fig 1). Details of
the methodology have been published previously.36 We checked the accuracy of life expectancy
estimates depending on granular or broad age intervals in the Short-term
Mortality Fluctuations data and found only small deviations, even for broad
age scales (see supplementary file for details of the methodology, including
sensitivity analysis, and supplementary figures S1 and S2). For 2015 data,
we used annual death counts and population exposures by five year age groups
from the Human Mortality Database.
Fig 1
Equation for splitting aggregated age groups using distribution of
forecasted death counts in the Human Mortality Database
Equation for splitting aggregated age groups using distribution of
forecasted death counts in the Human Mortality DatabaseWe derived life expectancy from abridged life tables, which were constructed
using standard life table methodology.40
41 The supplementary
file provides details of the methodology.To attribute an equal lifetime loss produced by a death at the same age
across the countries,42
43 we calculated the YLL from the
World Health Organization standard life table using the methodology
developed by the Global Burden of Disease, Injuries and Risk Factor
study.43
44 The equation in figure 2 was used to estimate the YLL.
Fig 2
Equation used to estimate years of life lost (YLL)
Equation used to estimate years of life lost (YLL)
Calculation of changes in life expectancy at birth and YLL in 2015 and
2020
Within each country, sex, and age groups, the reduction in life expectancy
was calculated as the difference between the observed and expected life
expectancy in 2020. The expected life expectancy for 2020 was based on
Lee-Carter forecasting using observed 2005-19 data.39 Similarly, the expected YLL was computed for 2020,
and excess YLL was calculated as the difference between observed and
expected YLL within each country, sex, and age group. The sum of the excess
YLL across the age groups, separately by sex, was used to estimate country
specific total excess YLL and excess YLL (per 100 000 population) in 2020.
As recommended, the excess YLL estimates were rounded to three significant
digits to avoid spurious accuracy.We estimated statistical uncertainty using a bootstrap method. Following a
standard demographic approach, we did not calculate confidence intervals for
life expectancy and YLL at the national level. Thus, we considered the
mortality forecast as the only source of statistical uncertainty. The
confidence intervals were based on the sample of 5000 iterations generated:
firstly, we derived a distribution of age specific forecasted mortality
rates and then we generated a random set of age specific death rates and
calculated our variables of interest (life expectancy, YLL, and changes in
life expectancy and YLL in 2020). The 2.5th quantile and the 97.5th quantile
of the bootstrap distribution for each statistic were used as the 95%
confidence intervals. The procedure was applied independently to each
country and sex strata.Our reference period for predicting mortality in 2020 is longer than the
period of 2015-19 used in several earlier studies. The period 2015-19
includes substantial increases in mortality during the winters of 2015,
2017, and 2018 that contributed to an attenuation of the mortality
improvements in many developed countries in these years.45
46
47 Consequently, the
choice of 2015-19 as a reference period might result in artificially
increased baseline mortality levels and underestimation of losses in life
expectancy and excess YLLs in 2020.To put our findings into context, we also calculated the change in life
expectancy and the YLL associated with the seasonal influenza epidemic in
2015 following the same methodology using data between 2000 and 2014 as the
reference period. We chose 2015 as a comparator to 2020 because in 2015 the
37 countries under study experienced the smallest average annual improvement
in mortality among all years between 2005 and 2019, coinciding with a
noticeable increase in mortality during winter.45
48
49
Decomposition of life expectancy losses in the US, Lithuania, Poland, and
Spain
Earlier research25
33 including our preliminary analysis
showed the highest life expectancy losses in the US compared with other OECD
(Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries in 2020.
Our previous study on excess mortality, however, reported the highest excess
crude death rates in Lithuania, Poland, Spain, Hungary, Italy, Belgium,
Slovenia, England and Wales, and Czech Republic, followed by the US.22 To explain these important
discrepancies, we conducted an exploratory decomposition analysis of the
life expectancy losses of 2020 in the US, and three countries with highest
excess crude death rates in 2020 (Lithuania, Poland, and Spain) using the
Andreev-Arriaga-Pressat method.50
51
52
53Statistical analyses were done using R (version 4.1.0) in RStudio. The
Lee-Carter forecast was performed using the R package
demography.54
Patient and public involvement
Patients and the public were not involved in this study because of the ongoing
covid-19 pandemic.
Results
Changes in life expectancy in 2020
In all the countries between 2005 and 2019, an increasing trend was observed in
life expectancy at birth, both in men and women (supplementary figure S3).
However, most countries showed a reduction in life expectancy in 2020, with the
largest overall reduction in life expectancy at birth (in years) in Russia
(−2.32, 95% confidence interval −2.55 to −2.11), the US (1.98, −2.16 to 1.82),
Bulgaria (−1.75, −2.09 to −1.41), Lithuania (−1.61, −1.92 to −1.29), and Poland
(−1.36, −1.55 to −1.17). Reductions in life expectancy in Italy, Spain, and
England and Wales were −1.35 (−1.72 to −0.99), −1.27 (−1.57 to −0.99), and −1.02
(−1.27 to −0.78), respectively. In contrast, a gain in life expectancy was
observed in New Zealand (0.66, 0.41 to 0.89) and Taiwan (0.35, 0.14 to 0.54); no
evidence was found of a change in life expectancy in South Korea (0.11, −0.09 to
0.30), Norway (0.07, −0.03 to 0.17), or Denmark (−0.09, −0.24 to 0.06) (fig 3).
Fig 3
Changes in life expectancy at birth associated with covid-19 pandemic in
2020. Change is calculated as the difference between observed and
expected life expectancy, estimated using the Lee-Carter model39
Changes in life expectancy at birth associated with covid-19 pandemic in
2020. Change is calculated as the difference between observed and
expected life expectancy, estimated using the Lee-Carter model39In all countries but Luxembourg, men had a higher reduction in life expectancy at
birth than women. The reduction in life expectancy in men was highest in Russia
(−2.33, −2.50 to −2.17), the US (−2.27, −2.39 to −2.15), Bulgaria (−1.96, −2.11
to −1.81), Lithuania (−1.83, −2.07 to −1.59), and Chile (−1.64, −1.97 to −1.32).
In women, the reduction in life expectancy was highest in Russia (−2.14, −2.25
to −2.03), the US (−1.61, −1.70 to −1.51), Bulgaria (−1.37, −1.74 to −1.01),
Lithuania (−1.21, −1.36 to −1.05), and Spain (−1.13, −1.37 to −0.90) (fig 3 and supplementary table S2).
Changes in years of life lost in 2020
Years of life lost declined in most countries in both men and women between 2005
and 2019, except Canada, Greece, Scotland, Taiwan, and the US (fig 4). The observed YLL in 2020 was higher
than expected in all countries except Taiwan and New Zealand, where there was a
reduction in YLL, and Iceland, South Korea, Denmark, and Norway, where there was
no evidence of a change in YLL in 2020. In the remaining 31 countries, more than
222 million (130 million in men and 92.6 million in women) years of life were
lost in 2020, which is 28.1 million (95% confidence interval 26.8m to 29.5m) YLL
higher than expected. The excess YLL in men and women were 17.3 million (16.8m
to 17.8m) and 10.8 million (10.4m to 11.3m), respectively.
Fig 4
Years of life lost (YLL) per 100 000 during 2005-20
Years of life lost (YLL) per 100 000 during 2005-20In men and women combined, excess YLL (per 100 000) were highest in Russia (5810,
95% confidence interval 5280 to 6340), Bulgaria (5440, 4460 to 6420), Lithuania
(3940, 3200 to 4680), the US (3380, 3160 to 3610), and Poland (2800, 2430 to
3170), with a higher rate in men than women. The highest excess YLL per 100 000
in men were observed in Bulgaria (7260, 6820 to 7710), Russia (7020, 6550 to
7480), Lithuania (5430, 4750 to 6070), the US (4350, 4170 to 4530), and Poland
(3830, 3540 to 4120); excess YLL in women were highest in Russia (4760, 4530 to
4990), Bulgaria (3730, 2740 to 4730), Lithuania (2640, 2310 to 2980), the US
(2430, 2320 to 2550), and Hungary (1920, 1590 to 2240) (fig 5 and supplementary table S3).
Fig 5
Excess years of life lost (YLL) in 2020 (per 100 000). Change is
calculated as the difference between observed and expected life
expectancy estimated using Lee-Carter model39
Excess years of life lost (YLL) in 2020 (per 100 000). Change is
calculated as the difference between observed and expected life
expectancy estimated using Lee-Carter model39Supplementary figure S4 shows the trend of YLL during 2005-20 by age and sex.
Figure 6 shows the excess YLL in 2020
by age and sex. In general, excess YLL increased with age, both in men and
women. However, Finland, Iceland, New Zealand, South Korea, and Taiwan had lower
than expected YLL in the elderly population (≥80 years). These countries had a
small increase, or a decrease, in YLL in other age groups as well (fig 6). Excess YLL rate was generally lower
in people younger than 65 years, except in Russia (3290, 2780 to 3810), Bulgaria
(2650, 2220 to 3070), Lithuania (2580, 1790 to 3410), and the US (2390, 2280 to
2510), with excess YLL rate >2000 per 100 000. The ratio of YLL rate between
people aged <65 and ≥65 years was 0.2 or higher in Estonia, Canada, Scotland,
the US, Lithuania, and Chile (see supplementary table S4).
Fig 6
Excess years of life lost (YLL) (per 100 000) by age and sex in 2020
Excess years of life lost (YLL) (per 100 000) by age and sex in 2020
Age components of life expectancy losses in US and comparator countries,
2020
Figure 7 shows age components of the life
expectancy losses in the US, Lithuania, Poland, and Spain in men and women
produced by differences between the observed and expected age specific death
rates by age intervals 0-14, 15-54, 55-64, 65-74, and ≥75. In the US and
Lithuania it appears that mortality excess in people younger than 65 years,
particularly among men, was responsible for a high proportion of the total
losses in life expectancy: the respective values for men and women were 62% and
42% in the US and 58% and 44% in Lithuania. Corresponding values in Poland were
27% and 8% and in Spain were 26% and 15%. These two countries, especially Spain,
showed an expected pattern, with the dominating role of older ages as a driver
of losses in life expectancy.
Fig 7
Age group components of difference between observed and expected life
expectancy (LE) in 2020 among men and women in the United States and
three comparator countries with the highest excess crude death rates in
2020. *Highest excess death rates according to Islam et al.22 The life table decomposition
analysis was conducted using the Andreev-Arriaga-Pressat method50
51
52
53
Age group components of difference between observed and expected life
expectancy (LE) in 2020 among men and women in the United States and
three comparator countries with the highest excess crude death rates in
2020. *Highest excess death rates according to Islam et al.22 The life table decomposition
analysis was conducted using the Andreev-Arriaga-Pressat method50
51
52
53
Changes in life expectancy and years of life lost: covid-19 (2020)
v influenza epidemic (2015)
Most countries experienced a reduction in life expectancy in 2015, but the
reduction in 2020 was substantially greater than that in 2015. Most countries
had excess YLL during the seasonal influenza epidemic in 2015, except Chile,
Estonia, Luxembourg, Latvia, Finland, New Zealand, Russia, and Taiwan (fig 8 and fig
9). The rate of excess YLL was, however, much higher in most
countries during the covid-19 pandemic in 2020 compared with the seasonal
influenza epidemic in 2015. Overall, the excess YLL in the 37 countries was 5.5
times higher during the covid-19 pandemic (2510 per 100 000, 95% confidence
interval 2390 to 2630 per 100 000) in 2020 than the excess YLL associated with
the seasonal influenza epidemic in 2015 (458, 325 to 592), with an absolute
difference of 2050 years of life lost per 100 000.
Fig 8
Changes in life expectancy during covid-19 pandemic in 2020 compared with
seasonal influenza epidemic in 2015
Fig 9
Changes in years of life lost (YLL) (per 100 000) during covid-19
pandemic in 2020 compared with seasonal influenza epidemic in 2015
Changes in life expectancy during covid-19 pandemic in 2020 compared with
seasonal influenza epidemic in 2015Changes in years of life lost (YLL) (per 100 000) during covid-19
pandemic in 2020 compared with seasonal influenza epidemic in 2015
Discussion
In this global comparative study of 37 countries, a reduction in life expectancy was
found in men and women in all countries except New Zealand, Taiwan, and Norway,
where there was a gain in life expectancy in 2020. We found no evidence of a change
in life expectancy in 2020 in Denmark, Iceland, and South Korea. The highest
reduction in life expectancy in men was observed in Russia, the US, Bulgaria,
Lithuania, and Chile; the highest reduction in women was observed in Russia, the US,
Bulgaria, Lithuania, and Spain. Years of life lost were higher than expected in all
countries except Taiwan, New Zealand, Iceland, Denmark, South Korea, and Norway. In
the remaining 31 countries, about 28 million excess years of life were lost in 2020
(17 million in men and 11 million in women). The highest excess YLL in both men and
women were observed in Russia, Bulgaria, Lithuania, the US, and Poland. The excess
YLL rate was relatively low in people younger than 65 years, except in Russia, the
US, Lithuania, and Bulgaria. The excess YLL rates associated with the covid-19
pandemic in 2020 were more than five times higher than those associated with the
seasonal influenza epidemic in 2015.
Comparison with previous literature
Country specific estimates of life expectancy, largely based on partial data in
2020, have been reported for the US,27
28 England and
Wales,29 and Spain.26 In the US, the trajectory of life
expectancy at birth during 2010-20 reported in our study is similar to that
reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).27 Drawing on data from the first half of
2020, this study reported a life expectancy of 77.8 years in the US,27 whereas the estimated life expectancy
at birth in our study was 77.4 years. Similarly, our estimates of life
expectancy at birth were 74.6 years in men and 80.3 years in women, which was
slightly lower than those reported in the CDC study (75.1 and 80.5 years,
respectively).27 These differences
could be due to a varying timeline used to estimate life expectancy—the CDC
study used data up to June 2020, whereas we used data for the full year.
Moreover, our earlier study showed that the excess death rates in the younger
age groups (15-64 years) increased during the latter months in 2020 (especially
during October-December).22In Aburto and colleagues’ study of England and Wales, using data up to the 47th
week (ending 20 November) of 2020, the estimated life expectancy was 82.6 years
in women and 78.7 years in men.29 These
findings are almost identical to the estimates from our study (82.7 and 78.7
years, respectively).Using data up to 5 July 2020, a previous study reported an estimated life
expectancy of 79.5 and 85.0 years in men and women, respectively, in Spain in
2020.26 These estimates are almost
identical to those from our study (79.6 and 85.0 years in men and women,
respectively).Multi-country life expectancy estimates and analyses of life expectancy losses
across countries have recently been published.55 In particular, the Eurostat has published preliminary estimates
of life expectancy at birth for member countries of the European Union.
Comparison between these estimates and our estimates was possible for 26
countries. For 21 countries, the differences were 0.1 years or lower (in both
men and women), which is attributable to different methods for building abridged
life tables and some remaining incompleteness of mortality data. The largest
deviations (0.3 years) were seen in the small populations of Iceland, Latvia,
and Luxembourg as well as Finland. However, the updated life expectancy
estimates by Statistics Finland are similar to our estimates.56A previous analysis reported the change in life expectancy across 29 developed
countries.33 Our analysis includes
eight additional countries. We were able to include data from Canada, Israel,
South Korea, New Zealand, Luxembourg, and Latvia because we applied a more
efficient procedure for estimation of the detailed mortality age distributions
that fully exploited all available data from the Human Mortality Database.
Taiwan was included because updates to Short-term Mortality Fluctuations allowed
us to fill former data gaps. Russia was included because Russian data for 2020
has recently been included in Short-term Mortality Fluctuations. Data for these
additional eight countries allowed us to observe most of the range of losses in
life expectancy in developed countries as well as to highlight the favourable
situation in New Zealand, Taiwan, and South Korea. For the subset of 29
countries present in both the studies, the life expectancy losses are in a good
agreement with a Spearman’s correlation coefficient of 0.94 between the two
rankings.Most of the studies that reported on YLL used deaths with covid-19 to estimate
potential YLL.23
30
31
32 One earlier study examined the change
in YLL due to excess deaths from all causes in 19 developed countries.23 All these studies, however, used
country specific remaining life expectancies, and in this sense the estimated
YLL are not comparable across the countries. Since deaths with covid-19 might
result in an underestimation or, in some cases, overestimation of the overall
impact of the pandemic on deaths and YLL, our estimates are not directly
comparable to these estimates. One study estimated 20.5 million YLL in 81
countries based on projected deaths with covid-19,23 whereas our study estimated 28.1 million YLL in only
31 countries. These findings suggest a substantial underestimation of the
overall impact on premature mortality if the estimates are based solely on
deaths with covid-19 or when the estimation of YLL uses country specific life
tables, or both. Moreover, covid-19 mortality data are often not disaggregated
by age at the levels (eg, five year age categories) required for an accurate
estimation of life expectancy and premature deaths.With a much lower reported number of deaths with covid-19 (n=1613) in Lithuania,
the estimated excess YLL were higher than in most of the countries (except
Bulgaria and Hungary), as were the estimated excess deaths in a previous
study.22 Our study found that the
additional years of life lost associated with the covid-19 pandemic in 2020 were
higher than those associated with the seasonal influenza epidemic in 2015, which
is consistent with a previous report.32
Our finding of comparable or lower than expected YLL in 2020 in Taiwan, New
Zealand, Iceland, and South Korea could be attributed to the successful pandemic
elimination policies of these countries, including evidence based population
health interventions.57
58
59
60
61
62 Taiwan and
New Zealand also had lower than expected YLL during the seasonal influenza
epidemic in 2015. Exploring the precise reasons for this is beyond the scope of
this study but could potentially be related to policy interventions, including
seasonal influenza vaccine coverage and systemic resilience of the public health
policy instruments.3
63 Public health policy interventions
aimed at reducing the transmission of SARS-CoV-21 might have had other indirect effects (eg, a reduction in deaths
from other causes, such as influenza and other respiratory infections, air
pollution, road traffic incidents) contributing to an overall reduction in YLL
in 2020.
Strengths and limitations of this study
In addition to using the two major public health measures reflecting prematurity
of death and accounting for trends, a key strength of our study was use of
validated and standardised mortality data from authoritative national agencies
to ensure comparability across countries and time. Rather than relying on deaths
with covid-19, we used all cause mortality data in our analysis, which are less
sensitive to coding error and misclassification in attributing the cause of
deaths. We also estimated the expected YLL based on 15 years of historical data
and applied a validated analytical approach that enables a more effective use of
available data from the Human Mortality Database, which in turn allowed us to
include more countries in the analysis. Rather than using an arbitrary age
threshold, we used WHO standard life expectancy to enable international
comparison of YLL following the standard methodology in the Global Burden of
Disease, Injuries and Risk Factor study.43
44 Our study does,
however, have some limitations. Firstly, our study was restricted to countries
with reliable data for the whole study period of 2000-20. Therefore, we did not
include most countries from Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Our assumption of a
no migration for population projection, when applicable, might not be
generalisable to analyses at subnational levels. We also could not examine the
variation in excess YLL by other critically important factors, such as
socioeconomic status and race or ethnicity.64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71 Previous studies also reported regional variability in
reduction in life expectancy, such as in Spain,26 but we did not have detailed regional data to examine this
important heterogeneity. Our study only reports the extent of premature lives
lost in 2020. As of October 2021, however, the covid-19 pandemic is not yet
over, and therefore future studies should estimate the long term burden of the
pandemic.
Policy implications and future directions
Our findings extend the existing literature on the direct and indirect effects of
the covid-19 pandemic and associated policy measures.22 Our results strongly justify a more nuanced estimation
of the lives lost beyond excess mortality. For example, with a similar burden of
excess deaths per 100 000 in Spain and the US (161 and 160, respectively),22 excess YLL (per 100 000) was
substantially higher in the US (3400) than in Spain (1900), indicating higher
numbers of deaths at younger ages in the US compared with Spain.22 Indeed, the ratio of YLL rate in
people aged <65 and ≥65 years at death was 0.29 in the US, whereas it was
only 0.07 in Spain. Despite a lower excess death rate than Lithuania, Poland,
and Spain,22 the reduction in life
expectancy in the US was higher than in these three countries. A full
examination of this phenomenon is beyond the scope of the current study.
Nevertheless, the decomposition analysis of the life expectancy losses in these
four countries reveals particularly large contributions to the reduction of life
expectancy from increases in mortality at ages younger than 65 years in the US.
However, our analyses were not able to identify whether these excess deaths were
directly caused by SARS-CoV-2 or were related to other causes of deaths. The
highest reduction in life expectancy, and highest increase in YLL, largely
occurred in countries where the baseline life expectancy was relatively low.
Therefore, baseline health status could have contributed to these results.
Widespread ethnic inequality in the US, as reported previously, might have
contributed to high YLL in the US.25
Future studies should conduct an in-depth examination to disentangle these
factors.Our findings of a comparable or lower than expected YLL in Taiwan, New Zealand,
Denmark, Iceland, Norway, and South Korea underscore the importance of
successful viral suppression and elimination policies, including targeted and
population based public health policy interventions.57
58
59
60
61
62 A comprehensive pandemic preparedness aimed at more
resilient health systems could be key to tackling the impact of future
pandemics.3
63 Quantifying the effects of specific policy
interventions on the reduction of premature deaths will help inform future
policy intervention. As many of the effects of the pandemic might take a longer
time frame to have a measurable effect on human lives, continuous and timely
monitoring of excess YLL would help identify the sources of excess mortality and
excess YLL in population subgroups.72Reported numbers of deaths with covid-19 are subject to changes
within and across countries as well as some degrees of delays,
inaccuracy, and incompletenessExcess deaths (difference between observed and expected numbers
of deaths from all causes) allows the assessment of the full
impact of the pandemic, including the direct effect on deaths
with covid-19, and the indirect effect of the pandemic on deaths
from other diseasesEstimation of excess deaths does not, however, consider the age
at death, and therefore does not quantify the impact of the
pandemic on premature deaths as years of life lost (YLL)In 2020, life expectancy was lower and YLL higher than expected
in all countries except New Zealand, Taiwan, Iceland, South
Korea, Denmark, and Norway—in the remaining 31 countries, >28
million excess years of life were lostHighest reduction in life expectancy in 2020 was observed in
Russia (men, −2.33 years; women, −2.14), the US (men, −2.27;
women, −1.61), Bulgaria (men −1.96; women, −1.37), Lithuania
(men, −1.83; women, −1.21), Chile (men, −1.64; women, −0.88),
and Spain (men, −1.35; women, −1.13)Excess YLL rates associated with the covid-19 pandemic in 2020
were more than five times higher than those associated with the
seasonal influenza epidemic in 2015
Authors: Amal K Mitra; Marinelle Payton; Nusrat Kabir; April Whitehead; Kimberly N Ragland; Alexis Brown Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-06-18 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Emily A Holmes; Rory C O'Connor; V Hugh Perry; Irene Tracey; Simon Wessely; Louise Arseneault; Clive Ballard; Helen Christensen; Roxane Cohen Silver; Ian Everall; Tamsin Ford; Ann John; Thomas Kabir; Kate King; Ira Madan; Susan Michie; Andrew K Przybylski; Roz Shafran; Angela Sweeney; Carol M Worthman; Lucy Yardley; Katherine Cowan; Claire Cope; Matthew Hotopf; Ed Bullmore Journal: Lancet Psychiatry Date: 2020-04-15 Impact factor: 27.083
Authors: Kathryn E Mansfield; Rohini Mathur; John Tazare; Alasdair D Henderson; Amy R Mulick; Helena Carreira; Anthony A Matthews; Patrick Bidulka; Alicia Gayle; Harriet Forbes; Sarah Cook; Angel Y S Wong; Helen Strongman; Kevin Wing; Charlotte Warren-Gash; Sharon L Cadogan; Liam Smeeth; Joseph F Hayes; Jennifer K Quint; Martin McKee; Sinéad M Langan Journal: Lancet Digit Health Date: 2021-02-18
Authors: Simon Ball; Amitava Banerjee; Colin Berry; Jonathan R Boyle; Benjamin Bray; William Bradlow; Afzal Chaudhry; Rikki Crawley; John Danesh; Alastair Denniston; Florian Falter; Jonine D Figueroa; Christopher Hall; Harry Hemingway; Emily Jefferson; Tom Johnson; Graham King; Kuan Ken Lee; Paul McKean; Suzanne Mason; Nicholas L Mills; Ewen Pearson; Munir Pirmohamed; Michael T C Poon; Rouven Priedon; Anoop Shah; Reecha Sofat; Jonathan A C Sterne; Fiona E Strachan; Cathie L M Sudlow; Zsolt Szarka; William Whiteley; Michael Wyatt Journal: Heart Date: 2020-10-05 Impact factor: 5.994
Authors: Hannes Schwandt; Janet Currie; Till von Wachter; Jonathan Kowarski; Derek Chapman; Steven H Woolf Journal: JAMA Date: 2022-07-26 Impact factor: 157.335