Tiered restrictions for COVID-19 in England: knowledge, motivation and self-reported behaviour.

OBJECTIVES: To test whether public knowledge and confidence in one's understanding of the local restrictions, motivation to adhere to local restrictions, and self-reported behaviour (going out for exercise, to work, socially) differed according to tier level. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional, nationally representative, online survey of 1728 participants living in England (data collection: 26 to 28 October 2020). METHODS: We conducted logistic regression analyses to investigate whether knowledge of restrictions, confidence in knowledge of restrictions, motivation to adhere to restrictions, and self-reported behaviour were associated with personal characteristics and tier. RESULTS: Between 81% (tier 2) and 89% (tier 3) of participants correctly identified which tier they lived in. Knowledge of specific restrictions was variable. 73% were confident that they understood which tier was in place in their local area, whereas 71% were confident they understood the guidance in their local area. Confidence was associated with being older and living in a less deprived area. 73% were motivated to adhere to restrictions in their local area. Motivation was associated with being female and older. People living in tiers with greater restrictions were less likely to report going out to meet people from another household socially; reported rates of going out for exercise and for work did not differ. CONCLUSIONS: Although recognition of local tier level was high, knowledge of specific guidance for tiers was variable. There was some indication that nuanced guidance (e.g. behaviour allowed in some settings but not others) was more poorly understood than guidance which was absolute (i.e. behaviour is either allowed or not allowed).

Do members of the public think they should use lateral flow tests (LFT) or polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests when they have COVID-19-like symptoms? The COVID-19 Rapid Survey of Adherence to Interventions and Responses study.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to investigate public use of lateral flow tests (LFT) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests when experiencing key COVID-19 symptoms. STUDY DESIGN: In this study, data from two waves of a cross-sectional nationally representative online survey (data collected 1 and 2 June, and 14 and 15 June 2021; n = 3665 adults aged ≥18 years living in England or Scotland) were used. METHODS: We report data investigating which type of test, if any, the public think Government guidance asks people to use if they have COVID-19 symptoms. In people with key COVID-19 symptoms (high temperature / fever; new, continuous cough; loss of sense of smell; loss of taste), we also describe the uptake of testing, if any. RESULTS: Ten percent of respondents thought Government guidance stated that they should take an LFT if symptomatic, whereas 18% of people thought that they should take a PCR test; 60% of people thought they should take both types of test (12% did not select either option). In people who were symptomatic, 32% reported taking a test to confirm whether they had COVID-19. Of these, 53% reported taking a PCR test and 44% reported taking an LFT. CONCLUSIONS: Despite Government guidance stating that anyone with key COVID-19 symptoms should complete a PCR test, a significant percentage of the population use LFT tests when symptomatic. Communications should emphasise the superiority of, and need for, PCR tests in people with symptoms.

Factors associated with non-essential workplace attendance during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK in early 2021: evidence from cross-sectional surveys.

OBJECTIVES: Working from home where possible is important in reducing the spread of COVID-19. In early 2021, a quarter of people in England who believed they could work entirely from home reported attending their workplace. To inform interventions to reduce this, this study examined associated factors. STUDY DESIGN: Data from the ongoing COVID-19 Rapid Survey of Adherence to Interventions and Responses survey series of nationally representative samples of people in the UK aged 16+ years in January-February 2021 were used. METHODS: The study sample was 1422 respondents who reported that they could work completely from home. The outcome measure was self-reported workplace attendance at least once during the preceding week. Factors of interest were analysed in three blocks: 1) sociodemographic variables, 2) variables relating to respondents' circumstances and 3) psychological variables. RESULTS: 26.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 24.5%-29.1%) of respondents reported having attended their workplace at least once in the preceding week. Sociodemographic variables and living circumstances significantly independently predicted non-essential workplace attendance: male gender (odds ratio [OR] = 1.85, 95% CI = 1.33-2.58); dependent children in the household (OR = 1.65, 95% CI = 1.17-2.32); financial hardship (OR = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.08-1.21); lower socio-economic grade (C2DE; OR = 1.65, 95% CI = 1.19-2.53); working in sectors such as health or social care (OR = 4.18, 95% CI = 2.56-6.81), education and childcare (OR = 2.45, 95% CI = 1.45-4.14) and key public service (OR = 3.78, 95% CI = 1.83-7.81) and having been vaccinated (OR = 2.08, 95% CI = 1.33-3.24). CONCLUSIONS: Non-essential workplace attendance in the UK in early 2021 during the COVID-19 pandemic was significantly independently associated with a range of sociodemographic variables and personal circumstances. Having been vaccinated, financial hardship, socio-economic grade C2DE, having a dependent child at home and working in certain key sectors were associated with higher likelihood of workplace attendance.

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

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.