T Epton
Systematic review of interventions to promote the performance of physical distancing behaviours during pandemics/epidemics of infectious diseases spread via aerosols or droplets
Epton, T; Ghio, D; Ballard, LM; Allen, SF; Kassianos, AP; Hewitt, R; Swainston, K; Fynn, WI; Rowland, V; Westbrook, J; Jenkinson, E; Morrow, A; McGeechan, GJ; Stanescu, S; Yousuf, A; Sharma, N; Begum, S; Karasouli, E; Scanlan, D; Shorter, GW; Arden, M; Armitage, C; O'Connor, D; Kamal, A; McBride, E; Swanson, V; Hart, J; Byrne-Davis, L; Chater, A; Drury, J
Authors
D Ghio
LM Ballard
SF Allen
AP Kassianos
R Hewitt
K Swainston
WI Fynn
V Rowland
J Westbrook
E Jenkinson
A Morrow
GJ McGeechan
S Stanescu
A Yousuf
N Sharma
S Begum
E Karasouli
D Scanlan
GW Shorter
M Arden
C Armitage
D O'Connor
A Kamal
E McBride
V Swanson
J Hart
L Byrne-Davis
A Chater
J Drury
Abstract
Objectives
Physical-distancing (i.e., keeping 1-2m apart when co-located) can prevent cases of infectious-diseases spread by droplets/aerosols (i.e. SARS-COV2). Distancing is a recommendation/requirement in many countries. This systematic-review aimed to determine which interventions and behaviour change techniques (BCTs) are effective in promoting adherence to physical-distancing and through which potential mechanisms of action (MOAs).
Methods
Six databases were searched for studies of physical-distancing interventions. A narrative synthesis included any design that included a comparator (e.g., pre-intervention versus post-intervention; randomised controlled trial), for any population and year. Risk-of-bias was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. BCTs and potential MoAs were identified in each intervention..
Results
Six papers of moderate/high quality indicated that distancing interventions could successfully change MoAs/behaviour. Successful BCTs (MoAs) included feedback on behaviour (e.g., motivation); information about/ salience of health consequences (e.g., beliefs about consequences) and demonstration (e.g., beliefs about capabilities) and restructuring the physical environment (e.g., environmental context and resources). The most promising interventions were proximity buzzers, directional systems and posters with loss-framed messages that demonstrated the behaviours.
Conclusions
High quality RCTs that measure behaviour, have representative samples and specify/test a larger range of BCTs /MoAs are needed.
Other Type | Experiment |
---|---|
Online Publication Date | Jun 13, 2021 |
Publication Date | Jun 13, 2021 |
Deposit Date | Jun 15, 2021 |
Publicly Available Date | Jun 15, 2021 |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/rn4vb |
Related Public URLs | https://psyarxiv.com/ https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/rn4vb |
Additional Information | Access Information : This is a pre-print paper and has not been through the peer-review process. The link above will direct to the latest version of the paper. Projects : Facilitating the public response to COVID-19 by harnessing group processes Grant Number: ES/V005383/1 |
Files
physical distancing review preprint.pdf
(749 Kb)
PDF
Licence
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain
Publisher Licence URL
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain
Version
Preprint Version 1
Downloadable Citations
About USIR
Administrator e-mail: library-research@salford.ac.uk
This application uses the following open-source libraries:
SheetJS Community Edition
Apache License Version 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/)
PDF.js
Apache License Version 2.0 (http://www.apache.org/licenses/)
Font Awesome
SIL OFL 1.1 (http://scripts.sil.org/OFL)
MIT License (http://opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.html)
CC BY 3.0 ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/)
Powered by Worktribe © 2025
Advanced Search