28
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Factors associated with adherence to self-isolation and lockdown measures in the UK: a cross-sectional survey

      , , , , , ,
      Public Health
      Elsevier BV

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives To investigate factors associated with adherence to self-isolation and lockdown measures due to COVID-19 in the UK. Study design Online cross-sectional survey. Methods Data were collected between 6th and 7th May 2020. A total of 2240 participants living in the UK aged 18 years or older were recruited from YouGov's online research panel. Results A total of 217 people (9.7%) reported that they or someone in their household had symptoms of COVID-19 (cough or high temperature/fever) in the last 7 days. Of these people, 75.1% had left the home in the last 24 h (defined as non-adherent). Men were more likely to be non-adherent, as were people who were less worried about COVID-19, and who perceived a smaller risk of catching COVID-19. Adherence was associated with having received help from someone outside your household. Results should be taken with caution as there was no evidence for associations when controlling for multiple analyses. Of people reporting no symptoms in the household, 24.5% had gone out shopping for non-essentials in the last week (defined as non-adherent). Factors associated with non-adherence and with a higher total number of outings in the last week included decreased perceived effectiveness of government ‘lockdown’ measures, decreased perceived severity of COVID-19 and decreased estimates of how many other people were following lockdown rules. Having received help was associated with better adherence. Conclusions Adherence to self-isolation is poor. As we move into a new phase of contact tracing and self-isolation, it is essential that adherence is improved. Communications should aim to increase knowledge about actions to take when symptomatic or if you have been in contact with a possible COVID-19 case. They should also emphasise the risk of catching and spreading COVID-19 when out and about and the effectiveness of preventative measures. Using volunteer networks effectively to support people in isolation may promote adherence.

          Related collections

          Most cited references14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Feasibility of controlling COVID-19 outbreaks by isolation of cases and contacts

          Summary Background Isolation of cases and contact tracing is used to control outbreaks of infectious diseases, and has been used for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Whether this strategy will achieve control depends on characteristics of both the pathogen and the response. Here we use a mathematical model to assess if isolation and contact tracing are able to control onwards transmission from imported cases of COVID-19. Methods We developed a stochastic transmission model, parameterised to the COVID-19 outbreak. We used the model to quantify the potential effectiveness of contact tracing and isolation of cases at controlling a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-like pathogen. We considered scenarios that varied in the number of initial cases, the basic reproduction number (R 0), the delay from symptom onset to isolation, the probability that contacts were traced, the proportion of transmission that occurred before symptom onset, and the proportion of subclinical infections. We assumed isolation prevented all further transmission in the model. Outbreaks were deemed controlled if transmission ended within 12 weeks or before 5000 cases in total. We measured the success of controlling outbreaks using isolation and contact tracing, and quantified the weekly maximum number of cases traced to measure feasibility of public health effort. Findings Simulated outbreaks starting with five initial cases, an R 0 of 1·5, and 0% transmission before symptom onset could be controlled even with low contact tracing probability; however, the probability of controlling an outbreak decreased with the number of initial cases, when R 0 was 2·5 or 3·5 and with more transmission before symptom onset. Across different initial numbers of cases, the majority of scenarios with an R 0 of 1·5 were controllable with less than 50% of contacts successfully traced. To control the majority of outbreaks, for R 0 of 2·5 more than 70% of contacts had to be traced, and for an R 0 of 3·5 more than 90% of contacts had to be traced. The delay between symptom onset and isolation had the largest role in determining whether an outbreak was controllable when R 0 was 1·5. For R 0 values of 2·5 or 3·5, if there were 40 initial cases, contact tracing and isolation were only potentially feasible when less than 1% of transmission occurred before symptom onset. Interpretation In most scenarios, highly effective contact tracing and case isolation is enough to control a new outbreak of COVID-19 within 3 months. The probability of control decreases with long delays from symptom onset to isolation, fewer cases ascertained by contact tracing, and increasing transmission before symptoms. This model can be modified to reflect updated transmission characteristics and more specific definitions of outbreak control to assess the potential success of local response efforts. Funding Wellcome Trust, Global Challenges Research Fund, and Health Data Research UK.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Isolation, quarantine, social distancing and community containment: pivotal role for old-style public health measures in the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) outbreak

            Public health measures were decisive in controlling the SARS epidemic in 2003. Isolation is the separation of ill persons from non-infected persons. Quarantine is movement restriction, often with fever surveillance, of contacts when it is not evident whether they have been infected but are not yet symptomatic or have not been infected. Community containment includes measures that range from increasing social distancing to community-wide quarantine. Whether these measures will be sufficient to control 2019-nCoV depends on addressing some unanswered questions.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Fangcang shelter hospitals: a novel concept for responding to public health emergencies

              Summary Fangcang shelter hospitals are a novel public health concept. They were implemented for the first time in China in February, 2020, to tackle the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak. The Fangcang shelter hospitals in China were large-scale, temporary hospitals, rapidly built by converting existing public venues, such as stadiums and exhibition centres, into health-care facilities. They served to isolate patients with mild to moderate COVID-19 from their families and communities, while providing medical care, disease monitoring, food, shelter, and social activities. We document the development of Fangcang shelter hospitals during the COVID-19 outbreak in China and explain their three key characteristics (rapid construction, massive scale, and low cost) and five essential functions (isolation, triage, basic medical care, frequent monitoring and rapid referral, and essential living and social engagement). Fangcang shelter hospitals could be powerful components of national responses to the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as future epidemics and public health emergencies.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Public Health
                Public Health
                Elsevier BV
                00333506
                October 2020
                October 2020
                : 187
                : 41-52
                Article
                10.1016/j.puhe.2020.07.024
                933f0a21-fca3-4156-b809-f979a4fc29f1
                © 2020

                https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

                http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article