Effect of face-covering use on adherence to other COVID-19 protective behaviours: A systematic review.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, concerns were raised that face covering use may elicit risk compensation; a false sense of security resulting in reduced adherence to other protective behaviours such as physical distancing. This systematic review aimed to investigate the effect of face covering use on adherence to other COVID-19 related protective behaviours. Medline, Embase, PsychInfo, EmCare, medRxiv preprints, Research Square and WHO COVID-19 Research Database were searched for all primary research studies published from 1st January 2020 to 17th May 2022 that investigated the effect of face covering use on adherence to other protective behaviours in public settings during the COVID-19 pandemic. Papers were selected and screened in accordance with the PRISMA framework. Backwards and forwards citation searches of included papers were also conducted on 16th September 2022, with eligible papers published between 1st January 2020 and that date being included. A quality appraisal including risk of bias was assessed using the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics' Quality Criteria Checklist. This review is registered on PROSPERO, number CRD42022331961. 47 papers were included, with quality ranging from low to high. These papers investigated the effects of face covering use and face covering policies on adherence to six categories of behaviour: physical distancing; mobility; face-touching; hand hygiene; close contacts; and generalised protective behaviour. Results reveal no consistent evidence for or against risk compensation, with findings varying according to behaviour and across study types, and therefore confident conclusions cannot be made. Any policy decisions related to face coverings must consider the inconsistencies and caveats in this evidence base.

An online RCT on behavioural expectations effects of COVID-19 certification policies in England.

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of different types of COVID-19 certification policy on subsequent behavioural expectations. Design: 4 × 2 between-subjects pre-registered randomised controlled trial. Method: In August 2022, participants (n = 2726) in England were presented with a scenario describing a rise in COVID-19 infections and the introduction of new protective measures. The protective measures described varied with regards to the setting (healthcare vs. recreational) and the type of policy (no certification vs. vaccination vs. vaccination or free Lateral Flow test vs. vaccination or Lateral Flow test at personal cost). Participants then answered questions on their expectations to receive another dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, to receive the seasonal influenza vaccine and to adhere to other protective behaviours following the announcement, as well as questions based on Self-Determination Theory, COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and broader vaccine hesitancy. Results: We found no main effects of setting or type of certification on expectation to receive the next dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, to receive the seasonal influenza vaccine, or to adhere to other protective measures, when controlling for baseline expectations. Conclusions: These findings suggest that it is unlikely that the concept of certification, however it is framed, alters inclinations in the English population towards COVID-19 and seasonal flu vaccination or inclinations towards adhering to other protective behaviours within settings to which certification would apply. These findings are based on a hypothetical scenario and should be interpreted with caution.

Local Community Response to Mass Asymptomatic COVID-19 Testing in Liverpool, England: Social Media Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Mass asymptomatic testing for COVID-19 was piloted for the first time in the United Kingdom in Liverpool in November 2020. There is limited evidence on uptake of mass testing, and previously where surge testing has been deployed, uptake has been low. OBJECTIVE: There was an urgent need to rapidly evaluate acceptance of asymptomatic testing, specifically identifying barriers and facilitators to taking part. METHODS: As part of the wider evaluation, we conducted a rapid thematic analysis of local community narratives on social media to provide insights from people unlikely to engage in testing or other standard evaluation techniques, such as surveys or interviews. We identified 3 publicly available data sources: the comments section of a local online newspaper, the city council Facebook page, and Twitter. Data were collected between November 2, 2020, and November 8, 2020, to cover the period between announcement of mass testing in Liverpool and the first week of testing. Overall, 1096 comments were sampled: 219 newspaper comments, 472 Facebook comments, and 405 tweets. Data were analyzed using an inductive thematic approach. RESULTS: Key barriers were accessibility, including site access and concerns over queuing. Queues were also highlighted as a concern due to risk of transmission. Consequences of testing, including an increase in cases leading to further restrictions and financial impact of the requirement for self-isolation, were also identified as barriers. In addition, a lack of trust in authorities and the test (including test accuracy and purpose of testing) was identified. Comments coded as indicative of lack of trust were coded in some cases as indicative of strong collective identity with the city of Liverpool and marginalization due to feeling like test subjects. However, other comments coded as identification with Liverpool were coded as indicative of motivation to engage in testing and encourage others to do so; for this group, being part of a pilot was seen as a positive experience and an opportunity to demonstrate the city could successfully manage the virus. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis highlights the importance of promoting honest and open communication to encourage and harness existing community identities to enhance the legitimacy of asymptomatic testing as a policy. In addition, adequate and accessible financial support needs to be in place prior to the implementation of community asymptomatic testing to mitigate any concerns surrounding financial hardship. Rapid thematic analysis of social media is a pragmatic method to gather insights from communities around acceptability of public health interventions, such as mass testing or vaccination uptake.

The Effectiveness of Interventions for Increasing COVID-19 Vaccine Uptake: A Systematic Review.

Vaccination is vital to protect the public against COVID-19. The aim of this systematic review is to identify and evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake. We searched a range of databases (Embase, Medline, Psychology & Behavioral Science, PsycInfo, Web of Science and NIH Preprints Portfolio) from March 2020 to July 2021 for studies which reported primary quantitative or qualitative research on interventions to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Outcome measures included vaccination uptake and reported intention to vaccinate. Reviews, position papers, conference abstracts, protocol papers and papers not in English were excluded. The NHLBI quality assessment was used to assess risk of bias. In total, 39 studies across 33 papers met the inclusion criteria. A total of 28 were assessed as good quality. They included interventions relating to communication content, communication delivery, communication presentation, policy or vaccination delivery, with 7 measuring vaccination uptake and 32 measuring vaccination intention. A narrative synthesis was conducted, which highlighted that there is reasonable evidence from studies investigating real behaviour suggesting that personalising communications and sending booking reminders via text message increases vaccine uptake. Findings on vaccination intention are mixed but suggest that communicating uncertainty about the vaccine does not decrease intention, whereas making vaccination mandatory could have a negative impact. Although much of the research used experimental designs, very few measured real behavioural outcomes. Understanding which interventions are most effective amongst vaccine-hesitant populations and in the context of booster vaccinations will be important as vaccine roll outs continue across the world.

Mass Casualty Decontamination for Chemical Incidents: Research Outcomes and Future Priorities.

Planning for major incidents involving the release of hazardous chemicals has been informed by a multi-disciplinary research agenda which has sought to inform all aspects of emergency response, but with a focus in recent years on mass casualty decontamination. In vitro and human volunteer studies have established the relative effectiveness of different decontamination protocols for a range of chemical agents. In parallel, a programme of research has focused on communicating with and managing large numbers of contaminated casualties at the scene of an incident. We present an accessible overview of the evidence underpinning current casualty decontamination strategies. We highlight where research outcomes can directly inform response planning, including the critical importance of beginning the decontamination process as soon as possible, the benefits of early removal of contaminated clothing, the evidence under-pinning dry and wet decontamination and how effective communication is essential to any decontamination response. We identify a range of priority areas for future research including establishing the significance of the 'wash-in' effect and developing effective strategies for the decontamination of hair. We also highlight several areas of future methodological development, such as the need for novel chemical simulants. Whilst considerable progress has been made towards incorporating research outcomes into operational policy and practice, we outline how this developing evidence-base might be used to inform future iterations of mass casualty decontamination guidance.

Mass Casualty Decontamination in the United States: An Online Survey of Current Practice.

Mass casualty decontamination is a public health intervention that would be employed by emergency responders following a chemical, biological, or radiological incident. The decontamination of large numbers of casualties is currently most often performed with water to remove contaminants from the skin surface. An online survey was conducted to explore US fire departments' decontamination practices and their preparedness for responding to incidents involving mass casualty decontamination. Survey respondents were asked to provide details of various aspects of their decontamination procedures, including expected response times to reach casualties, disrobing procedures, approaches to decontamination, characteristics of the decontamination showering process, provision for special populations, and any actions taken following decontamination. The aim of the survey was to identify any differences in the way in which decontamination guidance is implemented across US states. Results revealed that, in line with current guidance, many US fire departments routinely use the "ladder-pipe system" for conducting rapid, gross decontamination of casualties. The survey revealed significant variability in ladder-pipe construction, such as the position and number of fire hoses used. There was also variability in decontamination characteristics, such as water temperature and water pressure, detergent use, and shower duration. The results presented here provide important insights into the ways in which implementation of decontamination guidance can vary between US states. These inconsistencies are thought to reflect established perceived best practices and local adaptation of response plans to address practical and logistical constraints. These outcomes highlight the need for evidence-based national guidelines for conducting mass casualty decontamination.