Table 5. .
Regional disparity in terms of mortality from COVID-19 and resource availability in healthcare
| Region | COVID-19 mortality rate, % of infected (as of December 31, 2020)* |
COVID-19 mortality rate, % of infected (as of December 31, 2021)* |
Increase in the mortality rate in 2021 compared to 2020**, % | Resource availability index*** |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Russian Federation | 1.8 | 3.4 | 115 | 31.9 |
| Regions with lower rates of COVID-19 mortality in 2021 compared to the national average | ||||
| Republic of Tuva | 1.1 | 1.0 | 100 | 49.6 |
| Tomsk oblast | 0.9 | 1.2 | 116 | 39.0 |
| Moscow | 1.4 | 2.1 | 116 | 43.1 |
| Omsk oblast | 2.9 | 2.3 | 113 | 22.4 |
| Regions with rates of COVID-19 mortality in 2021 similar to the national average | ||||
| St. Petersburg | 3.2 | 3.3 | 116 | 45.5 |
| Leningrad oblast | 1.1 | 3.5 | 115 | 14.7 |
| Republic of Crimea | 2.0 | 3.8 | 117 | 13.4 |
| Vladimir oblast | 2.7 | 3.9 | 116 | 11.4 |
| Regions with higher rates of COVID-19 mortality in 2021 compared to the national average | ||||
| Krasnoyarsk krai | 3.7 | 5.5 | 116 | 35.3 |
| Sverdlovsk oblast | 2.6 | 5.6 | 114 | 23.7 |
| Stavropol krai | 2.1 | 5.9 | 117 | 10.1 |
| Altai krai | 2.7 | 6.6 | 116 | 16.9 |
| Tula oblast | 3.3 | 6.7 | 113 | 17.4 |
| Krasnodar krai | 3.4 | 9.7 | 120 | 8.4 |
| Chuvash Republic | 3.2 | 11.1 | 109 | 22.3 |
* On data of the Operational Headquarters for Preventing the Import and Spread of the Novel Coronavirus Infection on the Territory of the Russian Federation.
** Rosstat data.
*** The indicators of the regions’ security levels and preparedness for the pandemic outbreak are based on 2019 data and include: (1) healthcare spending from consolidated budgets of subjects of the Russian Federation and budgets of territorial extrabudgetary government funds adjusted for price differences, per capita; (2) number of doctors per 1000 population; (3) number of midlevel health workers per 1000 population; (4) number of hospital beds per 1000 population; (5) number of ambulances per 10 000 population; (6) indicator of availability of medicines (the ratio of the average monthly nominal accrued salary to prices of medicines, medical devices, and some medical services whose prices are monitored by Rosstat); (7) the ratio of doctor salary in the region, adjusted for the price differences, to the national average doctor salary; (8) the ratio of the salary of midlevel health workers in the region, adjusted for price differences, to the national average salary of midlevel health workers.The index is estimated as the sum of points assigned to the region depending on the value of physical indicators. The maximum value of the indicator is set at 9 percentile; regions with values above the maximum limit are assigned a value of 10. The minimum threshold value for indicators 1–6 is the first percentile, below which indicators take the value 0, for indicators 7–8—a value of 75% of the national average, below which indicators take the value 0. The indicators that are the most significant at any time, regardless of the epidemiological situation, (indicators 1–2, 6–7) were assigned weights of 1. The indicators that became especially significant and even critical during the epidemiological crisis (4–5) were assigned weights of 0.75. Indicators 3 and 8 were given weights of 0.5. The maximum possible number of points is 65.
Source: Data of the Operational Headquarter and Rosstat, authors’ calculations.