Decision to self-isolate during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: a rapid scoping review DOI Creative Commons
Claire Keene,

Sophie Dickinson,

Reshania Naidoo

et al.

BMJ Open, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: 14(3), P. e084437 - e084437

Published: March 1, 2024

Objective Testing for COVID-19 was a key component of the UK’s response to pandemic. This strategy relied on positive individuals self-isolating reduce transmission, making isolation lynchpin in public health approach. Therefore, we scoped evidence systematically identify and categorise barriers facilitators compliance with self-isolation guidance during pandemic UK, inform strategies future pandemics. Design A rapid scoping review conducted. Search Key terms were used search literature databases (PubMed, Scopus WHO Research Database, 7 November 2022), Google Scholar stakeholder-identified manuscripts, ultimately including published English from UK-based studies conducted between 2020 2022. Data extraction synthesis extracted synthesised into themes, organised broadly capability, opportunity motivation, reviewed stakeholders UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA). Results We included 105 sources, 63 identified UKHSA their decision-making Influences decision comply categorised six themes: perceived ability isolate; information guidance; logistics; social influences, trust; value; consequences. Individuals continuously assessed these factors deciding whether or not self-isolate. Conclusions Decisions self-isolate after test influenced by multiple factors, individuals’ beliefs, concerns, priorities personal circumstances. Future testing must facilitate meaningful financial, practical mental support allow overcome actual negative consequences isolating. Clear, consistent communication purpose procedures isolating will also be critical guidance, should leverage people’s value protecting others. Building trust is essential, but requires investment before next starts.

Language: Английский

Measures implemented in the school setting to contain the COVID-19 pandemic DOI
Hannah Littlecott, Shari Krishnaratne, Jacob Burns

et al.

Cochrane library, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: 2024(5)

Published: May 2, 2024

Language: Английский

Citations

12
Non-pharmaceutical interventions to reduce COVID-19 transmission in the UK: a rapid mapping review and interactive evidence gap map DOI Creative Commons
Daphné Duval, Bridie Evans,

Angélique Sanders

et al.

Journal of Public Health, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: 46(2), P. e279 - e293

Published: Feb. 29, 2024

Abstract Background Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) were crucial in the response to COVID-19 pandemic, although uncertainties about their effectiveness remain. This work aimed better understand evidence generated during pandemic on of NPIs implemented UK. Methods We conducted a rapid mapping review (search date: 1 March 2023) identify primary studies reporting reduce transmission. Included displayed an interactive gap map. Results After removal duplicates, 11 752 records screened. Of these, 151 included, including 100 modelling but only 2 randomized controlled trials and 10 longitudinal observational studies. Most reported isolate those who are or may become infectious, number contacts. There was for hand respiratory hygiene, ventilation cleaning. Conclusions Our findings show that despite large published, there is still lack robust evaluations need build evaluation into design implementation public health policies from start any future other emergency.

Language: Английский

Citations

6
Daily use of lateral flow devices by contacts of confirmed COVID-19 cases to enable exemption from isolation compared with standard self-isolation to reduce onward transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in England: a randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial DOI Creative Commons
Nicola Love, Derren Ready,

Charlie Turner

et al.

The Lancet Respiratory Medicine, Journal Year: 2022, Volume and Issue: 10(11), P. 1074 - 1085

Published: Oct. 10, 2022

In the UK, during study period (April to July, 2021), all contacts of people with COVID-19 were required self-isolate for 10 days, which had adverse impacts on individuals and society. Avoiding need those who remain uninfected would be beneficial. We investigated whether daily use lateral flow devices (LFDs) test SARS-CoV-2, removal self-isolation 24 h if negative, could a safe alternative as means minimise onward transmission virus.We conducted randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial in adult identified by contact tracing England. Consenting participants randomly assigned (single PCR test, 10-day isolation) or testing (DCT; seven LFD tests, two no isolation negative LFD); from single household same group. Participants prospectively followed up, effect each intervention established routinely collected NHS Test Trace data tested PCR-positive SARS-CoV-2 tertiary cases arising their (ie, secondary contacts). The primary outcome was attack rate, percentage (close SARS-CoV-2-positive participants) became (tertiary cases) Attack rates derived Bernoulli regression models using Huber-White (robust) sandwich estimator clustered standard errors. adjusted exposure, vaccination status, ability work home. margin 1·9%. analysis modified intention-to-treat excluding actively withdrew these longer held. This is registered Research Registry (number 6809). Data collection complete; ongoing.Between April 29 July 28, 2021, 54 923 eligible enrolled study, final group allocations (following withdrawals) 26 123 (52·6%) DCT 23 500 (47·4%) Overall, 4694 positive (secondary cases), 2364 (10·1%) 2330 (8·9%) Adjusted (among contacts) 7·5% 6·3% (difference -1·2% [95% CI -2·3 -0·2]; significantly lower than 1·9%).DCT exemption essential activities appears non-inferior self-isolation. provided evidence UK Government's policy vaccinated cases, indicated that LFDs allow reduce risk while minimising effects Although England are isolate, findings will relevant future decisions around other communicable infections.UK Government Department Health Social Care.

Language: Английский

Citations

19
Effect of Lianhua Qingwen capsules on the positive rate of COVID-19 close contacts: A retrospective analysis of a large-scale population-based cohort study DOI Creative Commons

Yunfeng Qiao,

Xiaolong Xu, Fangfang Zhou

et al.

Phytomedicine, Journal Year: 2023, Volume and Issue: 112, P. 154690 - 154690

Published: Feb. 3, 2023

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is still spreading worldwide. COVID-19 close contact a key point of this epidemic. However, no medication now available for contact. This study aims to evaluate the beneficial effect and safety Lianhua Qingwen capsule (LHQW) on contacts via large, retrospective cohort study.A total 25,002 from 199 quarantine sites in Changchun, Jilin, who underwent medical observation, were included. The information about these collected further epidemiological research. Moreover, subjects divided into an exposure group (LHQW group, oral, 4 capsules/time, t.i.d.; 18,579 subjects) non-exposure (control group; 6,423 subjects). Inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) with propensity score was employed positive rate SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid test nasal throat swabs confirmed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR).A 22,975 included analysis, 17,286 cases LHQW 5,689 control group. testing 5.12%, that 9.70% before adjustment IPTW score; difference between two groups -4.58% (95% CI -5.44- -3.77%, p < 0.001). After adjusting IPTW, 5.10% 9.80%, respectively; -4.70% -5.18- -4.23, conclusions after consistent. No drug-related adverse reactions observed during period.LHQW has are under observation at can be used as optional drug those contacts.

Language: Английский

Citations

6
Decision to self-isolate during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: a rapid scoping review DOI Creative Commons
Claire Keene,

Sophie Dickinson,

Reshania Naidoo

et al.

BMJ Open, Journal Year: 2024, Volume and Issue: 14(3), P. e084437 - e084437

Published: March 1, 2024

Objective Testing for COVID-19 was a key component of the UK’s response to pandemic. This strategy relied on positive individuals self-isolating reduce transmission, making isolation lynchpin in public health approach. Therefore, we scoped evidence systematically identify and categorise barriers facilitators compliance with self-isolation guidance during pandemic UK, inform strategies future pandemics. Design A rapid scoping review conducted. Search Key terms were used search literature databases (PubMed, Scopus WHO Research Database, 7 November 2022), Google Scholar stakeholder-identified manuscripts, ultimately including published English from UK-based studies conducted between 2020 2022. Data extraction synthesis extracted synthesised into themes, organised broadly capability, opportunity motivation, reviewed stakeholders UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA). Results We included 105 sources, 63 identified UKHSA their decision-making Influences decision comply categorised six themes: perceived ability isolate; information guidance; logistics; social influences, trust; value; consequences. Individuals continuously assessed these factors deciding whether or not self-isolate. Conclusions Decisions self-isolate after test influenced by multiple factors, individuals’ beliefs, concerns, priorities personal circumstances. Future testing must facilitate meaningful financial, practical mental support allow overcome actual negative consequences isolating. Clear, consistent communication purpose procedures isolating will also be critical guidance, should leverage people’s value protecting others. Building trust is essential, but requires investment before next starts.

Language: Английский

Citations

1