Search

Background: The use of behavioural science and behaviour change within local authorities and public health has supported healthful change; evidenced by its importance and contribution to reducing harm during the COVID-19 pandemic. It can provide valuable information to enable the creation of evidence-based intervention strategies, co-created with the people they are aimed at, in an effective and efficient manner. Aim: To understand the Capability, Opportunity and Motivation of performing a constellation of eight COVID-19 disease prevention behaviours related to the slogans of ‘Hands, Face, Space, Fresh Air’; ‘Find, Isolate, Test, (FIT), and Vaccinate’ in workplaces identified as high risk for transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2) to support intervention development. Method: This qualitative study recruited twenty-three participants (16 female, 7 male), who were interviewed from three environments (schools, care homes, warehouses) across three local authorities. Semi-structured interviews were analysed using thematic analysis. Findings: Ten core themes were identified inductively; 1) Knowledge and skills, 2) Regulating the behaviour, 3) Willingness to act, 4) Necessity and concerns, 5) Emotional impact, 6) Conducive environment, 7) Societal influence, 8) No longer united against COVID-19, 9) Credible leadership, and 10) Inconsistent adherence to COVID-19 prevention behaviours. Themes were then deductively mapped to the COM-B model of behaviour change (Michie et al., 2011; 2014) and the Theoretical Domains Framework (Cane et al., 2012) and a logic model using the Behaviour Change Wheel (Michie et al., 2011; 2014) was produced to inform intervention design. Conclusion: This study offers a novel approach to analysis that has included eight behaviours within a single thematic analysis and COM-B diagnosis. This will enable local authorities to direct limited resources to overarching priorities. Of key importance, was the need for supportive and credible leadership, alongside developing interventions collaboratively with the target audience. COVID-19 has had an emotional toll on those interviewed, however, promoting the value of disease prevention behaviours, over and above their costs, can facilitate behaviour. Developing knowledge and skills, through education, training, marketing and modelling can further facilitate behaviour. This supports guidance produced by the British Psychological Society COVID-19 Behavioural Science and Disease Prevention Taskforce.

Systematic review to explore what self-report measurement tools have been used to assess knowledge and attitudes of healthcare workers working in sub-Saharan African countries towards antimicrobial use, and how valid are these measures?

This guidance offers recommendations for interventions that can be used to encourage and enable physical distancing. The target behaviour for this guidance document is physical distancing, defined as staying 1–2 metres (depending on national guidance)apart from people in the same location. We are using the term ‘physical distancing’ as opposed to ‘social distancing’, in line with the World Health Organization and our earlier guidance.Physical distancing is important when viruses are airborne, such as the virus that causes Covid-19. Remaining at a physical distance from others reduces the risk of aerosols and droplets entering the eyes, nose or mouth and therefore reduces the risk of spreading infection, particularly with physical distancing of 1 metre or more3. Many governments and health agencies have recommended people adhere to a physical distance of between1 metre4 to 2 metres5 from people who are not in their household or ‘bubble’. In general, people typically stand a little less than 1 metre away from familiar people and 1.3 metre away from others6. Whilst many people have started to physically distance, standing metres away requires breaking strong habits. Even where regulations do not require physical distancing, people might still be encouraged to distance where possible, in regions where transmission rates are rising or high. This guidance is based on a systematic review of the evidence for interventions to encourage physical distancing and summarises the approaches that are effective in helping people to maintain physical distance from others. This included six papers, reporting 14 interventions with over 5500 people. There may be other approaches that could be effective but at present there is no evidence for or against them. It is important to note that some of the evidence reports influences on intention to distance physically rather than the action of physical distancing itself.

Public health teams need to understand how the public responds to vaccination messages in a pandemic or epidemic to inform successful campaigns encouraging the uptake of new vaccines as they become available. A rapid systematic review was performed by searching PsycINFO, MED-LINE, healthevidence.org, OSF Preprints and PsyArXiv Preprints in May 2020 for studies including at least one health message promoting vaccine uptake of airborne-, droplet-and fomite-spread vi-ruses. Included studies were assessed for quality using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) or the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR), and for patient and public involvement (PPI) in the research. Thirty-five articles were included. Most reported messages for seasonal influenza (n = 11; 31%) or H1N1 (n = 11; 31%). Evidence from moderate to high quality studies for improving vaccine uptake included providing information about virus risks and vaccination safety, as well as addressing vaccine misunderstandings, offering vaccination reminders, including vaccination clinic details, and delivering mixed media campaigns across hospitals or communities. Behavioural influences (beliefs and intentions) were improved when: shorter, risk-reducing or relative risk framing messages were used; the benefits of vaccination to society were emphasised; and beliefs about capability and concerns among target populations (e.g., vaccine safety) were addressed. Clear, credible, messages in a language target groups can understand were associated with higher accept-ability. Two studies (6%) described PPI in the research process. Future campaigns should consider the beliefs and information needs of target populations in their design, including ensuring that vaccine eligibility and availability is clear, and messages are accessible. More high quality research is needed to demonstrate the effects of messaging interventions on actual vaccine uptake.