Factors affecting adherence to non-pharmaceutical interventions for COVID-19 infections in the first year of the pandemic in the UK

OBJECTIVE: Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), including wearing face covering/masks, social distancing and working from home, have been introduced to control SARS-CoV-2 infections. We provide individual-level empirical evidence of whether adherence reduces infections. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS:...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ding, Xuejie, Brazel, David M, Mills, Melinda C
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2021
Materias:
Health Policy
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8557247/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34697126
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054200
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), including wearing face covering/masks, social distancing and working from home, have been introduced to control SARS-CoV-2 infections. We provide individual-level empirical evidence of whether adherence reduces infections. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: The COVID-19 Infection Study (CIS) was used from 10 May 2020 to 2 February 2021 with 409 009 COVID-19 nose and throat swab tests nested in 72 866 households for 100 138 individuals in the labour force aged 18–64. ANALYSIS: ORs for a positive COVID-19 test were calculated using multilevel logistic regression models, stratified by sex and time, by an index of autonomy to abide by NPIs, adjusted for various socioeconomic and behavioural covariates. RESULTS: Inability to comply with NPIs predicted higher infections when individuals reported not wearing a face covering outside. The main effect for inability to comply was OR 0.79 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.92), for wearing face covering/masks was OR 0.29 (95% CI 0.15 to 0.56) and the interaction term being OR 1.25 (95% CI 1.07 to 1.46). The youngest age groups had a significantly higher risk of infection (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.82) as did women in larger households (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.06). Effects varied over time with autonomy to follow NPIs only significant in the pre-second lockdown May–November 2020 period. Wearing a face covering outside was a significant predictor of a lower chance of infection before mid-December 2020 when a stricter second lockdown was implemented (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.73). CONCLUSION: The protective effect of wearing a face covering/mask was the strongest for those who were the most unable to comply with NPIs. Higher infection rates were in younger groups and women in large households. Wearing a face covering or mask outside the home consistently and significantly predicted lower infection before the 2020 Christmas period and among women.

Ejemplares similares