Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38722954›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Factors influencing uptake of protective behaviours by healthcare workers in England during the COVID-19 pandemic: A theory-based mixed-methods study.

Carly Meyer, Elise Crayton, Abigail Wright, Moira Spyer, Nina Vora, Catherine Houlihan, Naomi F Walker, Eleni Nastouli, Susan Michie, Fabiana Lorencatto and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Carly MeyerCentre for Behaviour Change, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2268-3055
Elise CraytonCentre for Behaviour Change, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9266-1302
Abigail WrightCentre for Behaviour Change, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2444-2407
Moira SpyerDepartment of Infection, Immunity and Inflammation, UCL GOS Institute of Child Health, London, United Kingdom.
Nina VoraUCL Centre for Clinical Research in Infection and Sexual Health, Institute for Global Health, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Catherine HoulihanDepartment of Clinical Virology, University College London Hospitals NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom.
Naomi F WalkerDepartment of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Eleni NastouliDepartment of Infection, Immunity and Inflammation, UCL GOS Institute of Child Health, London, United Kingdom.
Susan MichieCentre for Behaviour Change, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Fabiana LorencattoCentre for Behaviour Change, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
SAFER investigators

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_PC_19082
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHospital infection control policies protect patients and healthcare workers (HCWs) and limit the spread of pathogens, but adherence to COVID-19 guidance varies. We examined hospital HCWs' enactment of social distancing and use of personal protective equipment (PPE) during the COVID-19 pandemic, factors influencing these behaviours, and acceptability and feasibility of strategies to increase social distancing.

methodsAn online, cross-sectional survey (n = 86) and semi-structured interviews (n = 22) with HCWs in two English hospitals during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic (May-December 2020). The Capability, Opportunity, Motivation (COM-B) model of behaviour change underpinned survey and topic guide questions. Spearman Rho correlations examined associations between COM-B domains and behaviours. Interviews were analysed using inductive and deductive thematic analysis. Potential strategies to improve social distancing were selected using the Behaviour Change Wheel and discussed in a stakeholder workshop (n = 8 participants).

resultsSocial distancing enactment was low, with 85% of participants reporting very frequently or always being in close contact with others in communal areas. PPE use was high (88% very frequently or always using PPE in typical working day). Social distancing was associated with Physical Opportunity (e.g., size of physical space), Psychological Capability (e.g., clarity of guidance), and Social Opportunity (e.g., support from managers). Use of PPE was associated with Psychological Capability (e.g., training), Physical Opportunity (e.g., availability), Social Opportunity (e.g., impact on interactions with patients), and Reflective Motivation (e.g., beliefs that PPE is effective). Local champions and team competition were viewed as feasible strategies to improve social distancing.

conclusionsIt is valuable to understand and compare the drivers of individual protective behaviours; when faced with the same level of perceived threat, PPE use was high whereas social distancing was rarely enacted. Identified influences represent targets for intervention strategies in response to future infectious disease outbreaks.

Indexed as

COVID-19Health PersonnelPersonal Protective EquipmentAdultCross-Sectional StudiesEnglandFemaleHumansInfection ControlMaleMiddle AgedPandemicsPhysical DistancingSARS-CoV-2Surveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID38722954
PMCPMC11081271

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.