Measuring and increasing rates of self-isolation in the context of COVID-19: a systematic review with narrative synthesis.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to investigate (1) definitions of self-isolation used during the COVID-19 pandemic; (2) measures used to quantify adherence and their reliability, validity, and acceptability; (3) rates of self-isolation adherence; and (4) factors associated with adherence. STUDY DESIGN: This was a systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses and Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines (PROSPERO record CRD42022377820). METHODS: MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, Web of Science, PsyArXiv, medRxiv, and grey literature sources were searched (1 January 2020 to 13 December 2022) using terms related to COVID-19, isolation, and adherence. Studies were included if they contained original, quantitative data of self-isolation adherence during the COVID-19 pandemic. We extracted definitions of self-isolation, measures used to quantify adherence, adherence rates, and factors associated with adherence. RESULTS: We included 45 studies. Self-isolation was inconsistently defined. Four studies did not use self-report measures. Of 41 studies using self-report, one reported reliability; another gave indirect evidence for the lack of validity of the measure. Rates of adherence to self-isolation for studies with only some concerns of bias were 51%-86% for COVID-19 cases, 78%-94% for contacts, and 16% for people with COVID-19-like symptoms. There was little evidence that self-isolation adherence was associated with sociodemographic or psychological factors. CONCLUSIONS: There was no consensus in defining, operationalising, or measuring self-isolation, resulting in significant risk of bias in included studies. Future definitions of self-isolation should state behaviours to be enacted and duration. People recommended to self-isolate should be given support. Public health campaigns should aim to increase perceived effectiveness of self-isolation and promote accurate information about susceptibility to infection.

COVID-19 survey burden for health care workers: literature review and audit.

OBJECTIVES: Concerns have been raised about the quantity and quality of research conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly related to the mental health and wellbeing of health care workers (HCWs). For understanding the volume, source, methodological rigour and degree of overlap in COVID-19, studies were conducted among HCWs in the United Kingdom (UK). STUDY DESIGN: Mixed methods approach, literature review and audit. METHODS: First, a literature review of published research studies and second, an audit of studies HCWs have been invited to complete. For the literature review, we searched Medline, PsycINFO and Nexis, webpages of three medical organisations (Royal Society of Medicine, Royal College of Nursing and British Medical Association), and the YouGov website. For the audit, a non-random purposive sample of six HCWs from different London NHS Trusts reviewed email, WhatsApp and SMS messages they received for study invitations. RESULTS: The literature review identified 27 studies; the audit identified 70 study invitations. Studies identified by the literature review were largely of poor methodological rigour: only eight studies (30%) provided response rate, one study (4%) reported having ethical approval, and one study (4%) reported funding details. There was substantial overlap in the topics measured. In the audit, volunteers received a median of 12 invitations. The largest number of study invitations were for national surveys (n = 23), followed by local surveys (n = 16) and research surveys (n = 8). CONCLUSION: HCWs have been asked to complete numerous surveys that frequently have methodological shortcomings and overlapping aims. Many studies do not follow scientific good-practice and generate questionable, non-generalisable results.

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).

Learning about COVID-19 across borders: public health information and adherence among international travellers to the UK.

OBJECTIVE: Public health control measures at borders have long been central to national strategies for the prevention and containment of infectious diseases. Travel was inevitably associated with the rapid global transmission of COVID-19. In the UK, public health authorities tried to reduce the risks of travel-associated spread by providing public health information at ports of entry. This study investigates risk assessment processes, decision-making and adherence to official advice among international travellers, to provide evidence for future policy on the provision of public health information to facilitate safer international travel. STUDY DESIGN: This study is a qualitative study evaluation. METHOD: International air passengers arriving at the London Heathrow Airport on scheduled flights from China and Singapore were approached for interview after consenting to contact in completed surveys. Semi-structured interviews were conducted by telephone, using two topic guides to explore views of official public health information and self-isolation. Interview transcripts were coded and analysed thematically. RESULTS: Participants regarded official advice from Public Health England as adequate at the time, despite observing differences with intervention measures implemented in their countries of departure. Most participants also described adopting precautionary measures, including self-isolation and the use of face coverings that went beyond official advice, but reported adherence to guidance on contacting health authorities was more variable. Adherence to the official guidance was informed by the perceived salience of specific transmission possibilities and containment measures assessed in relation to participants' local social and institutional environments. CONCLUSION: Analysis of study findings demonstrates that international air travellers' responses to public health advice constitute a proactive process of risk assessment and rationalised decision-making to guide preventive action. This process incorporates consideration of the current living situation, trust in information sources, correspondence with cultural logics and willingness to accept potential risk to self and significant others. Our findings concerning international passengers' understanding of, and compliance with, official advice and mitigation measures provide valuable evidence to inform future policy and generate recommendations on the presentation of public health information to facilitate safer international travel. Access to a central source of regularly updated official information would help minimise confusion between different national guidelines. Greater attention to the differentiated information needs of diverse groups in creating future public-facing guidance would help to minimise the uncertainties generated by the receipt of generic information.

COVID-19 vaccination acceptability in the UK at the start of the vaccination programme: a nationally representative cross-sectional survey (CoVAccS - wave 2).

OBJECTIVES: Investigate factors associated with the intention to have the COVID-19 vaccination following initiation of the UK national vaccination programme. STUDY DESIGN: An online cross-sectional survey completed by 1500 adults (13th-15th January 2021). METHODS: Linear regression analyses were used to investigate associations between intention to be vaccinated for COVID-19 and sociodemographic factors, previous influenza vaccination, attitudes and beliefs about COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccination and vaccination in general. Participants' main reasons for likely vaccination (non-)uptake were also solicited. RESULTS: 73.5% of participants (95% CI 71.2%, 75.7%) reported being likely to be vaccinated against COVID-19, 17.3% (95% CI 15.4%, 19.3%) were unsure, and 9.3% (95% CI 7.9%, 10.8%) reported being unlikely to be vaccinated. The full regression model explained 69.8% of the variance in intention. Intention was associated with: having been/intending to be vaccinated for influenza last winter/this winter; stronger beliefs about social acceptability of a COVID-19 vaccine; the perceived need for vaccination; adequacy of information about the vaccine; and weaker beliefs that the vaccine is unsafe. Beliefs that only those at serious risk of illness should be vaccinated and that the vaccines are just a means for manufacturers to make money were negatively associated with vaccination intention. CONCLUSIONS: Most participants reported being likely to get the COVID-19 vaccination. COVID-19 vaccination attitudes and beliefs are a crucial factor underpinning vaccine intention. Continued engagement with the public with a focus on the importance and safety of vaccination is recommended.

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 affecting healthcare workers' compliance with social and behavioural infection control measures during emerging infectious disease outbreaks: rapid evidence review.

OBJECTIVE: The 2019-2020 outbreak of novel coronavirus has raised concerns about nosocomial transmission. This review's aim was to explore the existing literature on emerging infectious disease outbreaks to identify factors associated with compliance with infection control measures among healthcare staff. METHODS: A rapid evidence review for primary studies relevant to healthcare workers' compliance with infection control measures. RESULTS: Fifty-six papers were reviewed. Staff working in emergency or intensive care settings or with contact with confirmed cases appeared more likely to comply with recommendations. There was some evidence that anxiety and concern about the risk of infection were more associated with compliance, and that monitoring from superiors could improve compliance. Observed non-compliance of colleagues could hinder compliance. Staff identified many barriers to compliance related to personal protective equipment, including availability, perceived difficulty and effectiveness, inconvenience, discomfort and a negative impact on patient care. There were many issues regarding the communication and ease of understanding of infection control guidance. CONCLUSION: We recommend provision of training and education tailored for different occupational roles within the healthcare setting, managerial staff 'leading by example', ensuring adequate resources for infection control and timely provision of practical evidence-based infection control guidelines.

Parental perceptions of COVID-19-like illness in their children.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study is to explore parents' perceptions of COVID-19-like symptoms in their child and attitudes towards isolating from others in the household when unwell. STUDY DESIGN: The study used qualitative, semistructured interviews. METHODS: The study involved thirty semistructured telephone interviews with parents of children between 4 and 18 years. Thirty semistructured telephone interviews with parents of children between 4 and 18 years. RESULTS: We found four themes relating to symptom attribution ('normalising symptoms', 'err on the side of caution', 'experience of temperature', 'symptoms not normal for us'). In general, parents were more likely to attribute symptoms to COVID-19 if a temperature was present or the symptoms were perceived as 'unusual' for their family. Four themes relating to self-isolation ('difficult to prevent contact with children', 'isolation would be no different to lockdown life', 'ability to get food and supplies', 'limited space'). Parents believed they would find isolation within the household difficult or impossible if they had dependent children, had limited space or could not shop for groceries. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlight complexities in symptom perception, attribution and household isolation. We suggest that they can be overcome by (a) providing better guidance on what symptoms require action, (b) providing guidance as to how to prevent infection within the household and (c) by supporting families with grocery shopping through a potential second or third wave.

Public health information on COVID-19 for international travellers: lessons learned from a mixed-method evaluation.

OBJECTIVES: In the containment phase of the response to the COVID-19 outbreak, Public Health England (PHE) delivered advice to travellers arriving at major UK ports. We aimed to rapidly evaluate the impact and effectiveness of these communication materials for passengers in the early stages of the pandemic. STUDY DESIGN: The study design used is the mixed-methods evaluation. METHODS: A questionnaire survey and follow-up interviews with passengers arriving at London Heathrow Airport on scheduled flights from China and Singapore. The survey assessed passengers' knowledge of symptoms, actions to take, and attitudes towards PHE COVID-19 public health information; interviews explored their views of official public health information and self-isolation. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-one passengers participated in the survey and 15 in follow-up interviews. Eighty three percentage of surveyed passengers correctly identified all three COVID-19 associated symptoms listed in PHE information at that time. Most could identify the recommended actions and found the advice understandable and trustworthy. Interviews revealed that passengers shared concerns about the lack of wider official action, and that passengers' knowledge had been acquired elsewhere as much from PHE. Respondents also noted their own agency in choosing to self-isolate, partially as a self-protective measure. CONCLUSION: PHE COVID-19 public health information was perceived as clear and acceptable, but we found that passengers acquired knowledge from various sources and they saw the provision of information alone on arrival as an insufficient official response. Our study provides fresh insights into the importance of taking greater account of diverse information sources and of the need for public assurance in creating public health information materials to address global health threats.

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.

How to improve adherence with quarantine: rapid review of the evidence.

OBJECTIVES: The December 2019 outbreak of coronavirus has once again thrown the vexed issue of quarantine into the spotlight, with many countries asking their citizens to 'self-isolate' if they have potentially come into contact with the infection. However, adhering to quarantine is difficult. Decisions on how to apply quarantine should be based on the best available evidence to increase the likelihood of people adhering to protocols. We conducted a rapid review to identify factors associated with adherence to quarantine during infectious disease outbreaks. STUDY DESIGN: The study design is a rapid evidence review. METHODS: We searched Medline, PsycINFO and Web of Science for published literature on the reasons for and factors associated with adherence to quarantine during an infectious disease outbreak. RESULTS: We found 3163 articles and included 14 in the review. Adherence to quarantine ranged from as little as 0 up to 92.8%. The main factors which influenced or were associated with adherence decisions were the knowledge people had about the disease and quarantine procedure, social norms, perceived benefits of quarantine and perceived risk of the disease, as well as practical issues such as running out of supplies or the financial consequences of being out of work. CONCLUSIONS: People vary in their adherence to quarantine during infectious disease outbreaks. To improve this, public health officials should provide a timely, clear rationale for quarantine and information about protocols; emphasise social norms to encourage this altruistic behaviour; increase the perceived benefit that engaging in quarantine will have on public health; and ensure that sufficient supplies of food, medication and other essentials are provided.

Psychological resilience and post-traumatic growth in disaster-exposed organisations: overview of the literature.

As disasters become increasingly prevalent, and reported on, a wealth of literature on post-disaster mental health has been published. Most published evidence focuses on symptoms of mental health problems (such as post-traumatic stress disorder, depression and anxiety) and psychosocial factors increasing the risk of such symptoms. However, a recent shift in the literature has moved to exploring resilience and the absence of adverse lasting mental health effects following a disaster. This paper undertakes a qualitative review of the literature to explore factors affecting psychological resilience, as well as the potential positive impact of experiencing a disaster (post-traumatic growth) by examining the literature on employees in disaster-exposed organisations. We identify several protective factors: training, experience, and perceived (personal) competence; social support; and effective coping strategies. Post-traumatic growth frequently appeared to occur at both personal and professional levels for those rescue staff after a disaster, giving employees a greater appreciation of life and their relationships, enhancing their self-esteem and providing a sense of accomplishment and better understanding of their work. Implications, in terms of how to build a resilient workforce, are discussed.

A systematic review of infectious illness Presenteeism: prevalence, reasons and risk factors.

BACKGROUND: Workplace presenteeism is common and leads to the spread of infectious diseases. Previous reviews have focused on presenteeism in relation to general physical or mental ill health. In this systematic review we identified the prevalence of, and reasons and risk factors for, presenteeism in relation to an infectious illness. METHOD: We searched Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO and PsycARTICLES with terms relating to infectious illnesses and presenteeism at the work place or school; reference lists of relevant articles were also hand-searched. RESULT: Our search yielded 3580 papers after deduplication. After title, abstract and full text screening, 23 papers reporting on 24 studies were included. Twenty-three studies were cross-sectional studies and one was prospective. The quality of included studies was relatively poor due to problems such as sampling and non-response bias. Presenteeism prevalence ranged from 35 to 97%. Self-reported reasons for presenteeism fell into three main themes: 1. Organisational factors (organisational policy, presenteeism culture, disciplinary action), 2. Job characteristics (lack of cover, professionalism, job demand), and 3. Personal reasons (burden on colleagues, colleague perceptions, threshold of sickness absence and financial concerns). Statistical risk factors fell into four themes: 1. Sociodemographic, 2. Health, 3. Influenza-related behaviour, and 4. Employment characteristics. Most of the risk factors had insufficient evidence to allow us to draw any firm conclusions, and evidence regarding gender and age was inconsistent. The risk factor with the most consistent findings concerned occupation type, suggesting that those who worked in the healthcare sector, and specifically physicians, were at a higher risk of infectious illness presenteeism. CONCLUSION: Infectious illness presenteeism is common. To address the public health consequences, organisations should focus on promoting a positive working culture and developing sickness absence policies that reduce presenteeism. Further research is needed in non-health sector organisations and schools to identify risk factors related to different organisations, which can then be used to tailor interventions at the organisational and individual level.

Explaining all without causing unnecessary harm: Is there scope for positively framing medical risk information?

Clinicians in the United Kingdom are now legally obliged to tell patients about every risk involved in prescribed medical treatments. Although important for informed consent, warning patients of risks such as side-effects can increase the incidence of these very side-effects, through the nocebo effect. Positively framing risk information could be a potential solution to this dilemma, and preliminary data has shown it is effective in healthy volunteers receiving a sham drug. Future research is needed to test its effectiveness in a clinical population.

Who is sceptical about emerging public health threats? Results from 39 national surveys in the United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVES: Members of the public are often sceptical about warnings of an impending public health crisis. Breaking through this scepticism is important if we are to convince people to take urgent protective action. In this paper we explored correlates of perceiving that 'too much fuss' was being made about the 2009/10 influenza A H1N1v ('swine flu') pandemic. STUDY DESIGN: A secondary analysis of data from 39 nationally representative telephone surveys conducted in the UK during the pandemic. METHODS: Each cross-sectional survey (combined n = 42,420) collected data over a three day period and asked participants to state whether they agreed or disagreed that 'too much fuss is being made about the risk of swine flu.' RESULTS: Overall, 55.1% of people agreed or strongly agreed with this sentiment. Perceiving that too much fuss was being made was associated with: being male, being white, being generally healthy, trusting most in a primary care physician to provide advice, not knowing someone who had contracted the illness, believing you know a lot about the outbreak, not wishing to receive additional information about the outbreak and possessing worse factual knowledge about the outbreak than other people. CONCLUSIONS: In future disease outbreaks merely providing factual information is unlikely to engage people who are sceptical about the need to take action. Instead, messages which challenge their perceived knowledge and which present case studies of people who have been affected may prove more effective, especially when delivered through trusted channels.

New influenza A/H1N1 ("swine flu"): information needs of airport passengers and staff.

BACKGROUND: Airports are the entrances of infectious diseases. Particularly at the beginning of an outbreak, information and communication play an important role to enable the early detection of signs or symptoms and to encourage passengers to adopt appropriate preventive behaviour to limit the spread of the disease. OBJECTIVES: To determine the adequacy of the information provided to airport passengers and staff in meeting their information needs in relation to their concerns. METHODS: At the start of the influenza A/H1N1 epidemic (29-30 April 2009), qualitative semi-structured interviews (N = 101) were conducted at Frankfurt International Airport with passengers who were either returning from or going to Mexico and with airport staff who had close contact with these passengers. Interviews focused on knowledge about swine flu, information needs and fear or concern about the outbreak. RESULTS: The results showed that a desire for more information was associated with higher concern - the least concerned participants did not want any additional information, while the most concerned participants reported a range of information needs. Airport staff in contact with passengers travelling from the epicentre of the outbreak showed the highest levels of fear or concern, coupled with a desire to be adequately briefed by their employer. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that information strategies should address not only the exposed or potentially exposed but also groups that feel at risk. Identifying what information these different passenger and staff groups wish to receive will be an important task in any future infectious disease outbreak.

The impact of communications about swine flu (influenza A H1N1v) on public responses to the outbreak: results from 36 national telephone surveys in the UK.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the association between levels of worry about the possibility of catching swine flu and the volume of media reporting about it; the role of psychological factors in predicting likely uptake of the swine flu vaccine; and the role of media coverage and advertising in predicting other swine flu-related behaviours. DESIGN: Data from a series of random-digit-dial telephone surveys were analysed. A time series analysis tested the association between levels of worry and the volume of media reporting on the start day of each survey. Cross-sectional regression analyses assessed the relationships between likely vaccine uptake or behaviour and predictor variables. SETTING: Thirty-six surveys were run at, on average, weekly intervals across the UK between 1 May 2009 and 10 January 2010. Five surveys (run between 14 August and 13 September) were used to assess likely vaccine uptake. Five surveys (1-17 May) provided data relating to other behaviours. PARTICIPANTS: Between 1047 and 1173 people aged 16 years or over took part in each survey: 5175 participants provided data about their likely uptake of the swine flu vaccine; 5419 participants provided data relating to other behaviours. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: All participants were asked to state how worried they were about the possibility of personally catching swine flu. Subsets were asked how likely they were to take up a swine flu vaccination if offered it and whether they had recently carried tissues with them, bought sanitising hand gel, avoided using public transport or had been to see a general practitioner, visited a hospital or called NHS Direct for a flu-related reason. RESULTS: The percentage of 'very' or 'fairly' worried participants fluctuated between 9.6% and 32.9%. This figure was associated with the volume of media reporting, even after adjusting for the changing severity of the outbreak [chi2(1) = 6.6, p = 0.010, coefficient for log-transformed data = 2.6]. However, this effect only occurred during the UK's first summer wave of swine flu. In total, 56.1% of respondents were very or fairly likely to accept the swine flu vaccine. The strongest predictors were being very worried about the possibility of oneself [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 4.7, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.2 to 7.0] or one's child (aOR 8.0, 95% CI 4.6 to 13.9) catching swine flu. Overall, 33.1% of participants reporting carrying tissues with them, 9.5% had bought sanitising gel, 2.0% had avoided public transport and 1.6% had sought medical advice. Exposure to media coverage or advertising about swine flu increased tissue carrying or buying of sanitising hand gel, and reduced avoidance of public transport or consultation with health services during early May 2009. Path analyses showed that media coverage and advertising had these differential effects because they raised the perceived efficacy of hygiene behaviours but decreased the perceived efficacy of avoidance behaviours. CONCLUSIONS: During the swine flu outbreak, uptake rates for protective behaviours and likely acceptance rates for vaccination were low. One reason for this may in part be explained by was the low level of public worry about the possibility of catching swine flu. When levels of worry are generally low, acting to increase the volume of mass media and advertising coverage is likely to increase the perceived efficacy of recommended behaviours, which, in turn, is likely to increase their uptake.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of interventions for postoperative fatigue.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative fatigue is common, even after uncomplicated operations. Various theories have been presented regarding its aetiology, each suggesting different possible interventions. The purpose of this review was to identify all studies that have assessed interventions for postoperative fatigue and to evaluate these interventions using meta-analytical techniques. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials of interventions, identified from a systematic search of relevant databases, were evaluated according to standardized criteria and categorized according to intervention modality. Data relating to the efficacy of each intervention at four different postoperative time-points were collated and data synthesis by meta-analysis was performed. RESULTS: Analgesia is effective in reducing fatigue immediately after operation. Perioperative administration of human growth hormone reduces fatigue between 8 and 30 days after abdominal surgery. Weaker evidence was found to suggest an influence of glucocorticoid administration and of surgical technique on fatigue in the first week after operation. No evidence was found to support the theory that psychosocial or nutritional interventions affect the symptom. CONCLUSION: While the results demonstrate that improved analgesia can attenuate immediate postoperative fatigue in most patient groups, further research is needed to determine whether the efficacy of human growth hormone and glucocorticoids extends beyond abdominal surgery. The paucity of research into cognitive-behavioural, sleep and activity-based interventions also needs to be addressed.