Abstract

There has been much discussion recently about the importance of implementing non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to protect the public from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Different governments across the world have adopted NPIs (e.g., social distancing, quarantine, isolation, lockdowns, curfews, travel restrictions, closures of schools and colleges). Two fundamental strategies, namely a strict containment strategy—also called suppression strategy—and a mitigation strategy have been adopted in different countries, mainly to reduce the reproduction number (R0) to below one and hence to reduce case numbers to low levels or eliminate human-to-human transmission, as well as to use NPIs to interrupt transmission completely and to reduce the health impact of epidemics, respectively. However, the adoption of these NPI strategies is varied and the factors impacting NPI are inconsistent and unclear. This study, therefore, aimed to review the factors associated with the implementation of NPIs (social distancing, social isolation and quarantine) for reducing COVID-19. Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched for published and unpublished studies, undertaking a systematic search of: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Allied and Complementary Medicine, COVID-19 Research, WHO database on COVID-19, and Google Scholar. Thirty-three studies were included in the study. Seven descriptive themes emerged on enablers and barriers to NPIs: the positive impact of NPIs, effective public health interventions, positive change in people’s behaviour and concerns about COVID-19, the role of mass media, physical and psychological impacts, and ethnicity/age associated with COVID-19. This study has highlighted that the effectiveness of NPIs in isolation is likely to be limited, therefore, a combination of multiple measures e.g., SD, isolation and quarantine, and workplace distancing appeared more effective in reducing COVID-19. Studies suggest that targeted approaches alongside social distancing might be the way forward, and more acceptable. Further research to promote country- and context-specific adoption of NPIs to deliver public health measures is needed. Studies comparing the effectiveness of interventions and strategies will help provide more evidence for future pandemics.

Highlights

  • IntroductionCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19; caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)), emerged in Wuhan, China in December 2019, and is currently the greatest public health challenge

  • When we look at evidence focusing on BAME/African Americans in connection with nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), we did not find any specific data or evidence that connect with NPIs, but there are a number of possible reasons reported in the literature

  • The electronic databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, Allied and Complementary Medicine, COVID-19 Research, the WHO database on COVID-19 and Google Scholar on COVID-19 from December 2019 to March 2021, with the last search conducted on 12 March 2021, to contemplate the recent pandemic

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19; caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)), emerged in Wuhan, China in December 2019, and is currently the greatest public health challenge. At the time of writing (9 April 2021), the WHO COVID-19 Dashboard reports that this virus has already affected 223 countries and territories with approximately 133,552,774 confirmed cases and 2,894,295 deaths; a fatality rate of 2.17% [1]. There has been much discussion about the importance of implementing NPIs to protect the public from COVID-19 infection.

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call