Interventions to increase personal protective behaviours to limit the spread of respiratory viruses: A rapid evidence review and meta‐analysis

Perski, Olga, Szinay, Dorothy, Corker, Elizabeth, Shahab, Lion, West, Robert and Michie, Susan (2021) Interventions to increase personal protective behaviours to limit the spread of respiratory viruses: A rapid evidence review and meta‐analysis. British Journal of Health Psychology. ISSN 1359-107X

[img]
Preview
PDF (bjhp.12542) - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.

Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

Purpose: Increasing personal protective behaviours is critical for stopping the spread of respiratory viruses, including SARS-CoV-2: We need evidence to inform how to achieve this. We aimed to synthesize evidence on interventions to increase six personal protective behaviours (e.g., hand hygiene, face mask use, maintaining physical distancing) to limit the spread of respiratory viruses. Methods: We used best practice for rapid evidence reviews. We searched Ovid MEDLINE and Scopus. Studies conducted in adults or children with active or passive comparators were included. We extracted data on study design, intervention content, mode of delivery, population, setting, mechanism(s) of action, acceptability, practicability, effectiveness, affordability, spill-over effects, and equity impact. Study quality was assessed with Cochrane’s risk-of-bias tool. A narrative synthesis and random-effects meta-analyses were conducted. Results: We identified 39 studies conducted across 15 countries. Interventions targeted hand hygiene (n = 30) and/or face mask use (n = 12) and used two- or three-arm study designs with passive comparators. Interventions were typically delivered face-to-face and included a median of three behaviour change techniques. The quality of included studies was low. Interventions to increase hand hygiene (k = 6) had a medium, positive effect (d =.62, 95% CI = 0.43–0.80, p <.001, I 2= 81.2%). Interventions targeting face mask use (k = 4) had mixed results, with an imprecise pooled estimate (OR = 4.14, 95% CI = 1.24–13.79, p <.001, I 2= 89.67%). Between-study heterogeneity was high. Conclusions: We found low-quality evidence for positive effects of interventions targeting hand hygiene, with unclear results for interventions targeting face mask use. There was a lack of evidence for most behaviours of interest within this review.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: covid-19,sars-cov-2,behaviour change,intervention,personal protective behaviours,rapid review,applied psychology ,/dk/atira/pure/subjectarea/asjc/3200/3202
Faculty \ School: Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > School of Health Sciences
Related URLs:
Depositing User: LivePure Connector
Date Deposited: 13 Jul 2021 00:10
Last Modified: 21 Jul 2021 01:49
URI: https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/80534
DOI: 10.1111/bjhp.12542

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item