ABSTRACT
In order to inform clinical and research practice in secondary care in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, an online survey was used to collect public opinions on attending hospitals. The survey link was circulated via the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Public Involvement (PPI) Leads network and social media. 402 people completed the survey. Participants age ranged from the 18-85+, with the majority (337 (84%)) aged between 35 to 74 years. There were a higher number of women (77%) compared to men (23%); and were mainly White European (91%) compared to BAME (6%), or other (2%).
Data collection included self-identified risk status due to comorbidity or age, and 100 point Likert-type scales to measures feelings of safety, factors affecting feelings of safety, intention to participate in research, comfort with new ways of working and attitudes to research.
Results for feelings of safety scales indicate two distinct groups; one of respondents who felt quite safe and one of those who did not. Implementation of COVID-19 related safety measures such as social distancing, use of PPE and cleaning were strongly supported by most respondents. There was ambivalence around less certain measures such as regular staff antigen and antibody testing. Respondents were most likely to participate in research related to their own condition, COVID-19 research and vaccine research, but less likely to participate in healthy volunteer research, especially if suffering from a pre-existing comorbidity identified with increased risk or were female. There was general agreement that participants are comfortable with new ways of working, such as remote consultation, though women and BAME respondents were less comfortable. Findings raise concerns for health inequalities already impacting some groups in the pandemic. The role of clinical necessity and personal benefit support the reopening of services in line with clinical necessity. Moderate caution in respect of vaccine research relative to patient-participant research presents a challenge for pending recruitment demands, and would benefit from qualitative research to explore themes and concerns in more depth and support development and targeting of key messaging.
SUMMARY BOX
What is already known on this topic?Very little is known about public perceptions of risk of exposure to COVID-19 and engagement with clinical and research provision in secondary care.
This research explores public perspectives in five key areas in order to inform health policy and both population and individual communication regarding attending secondary care sites for clinical and research activities.
Insight into public risk perceptions specific to attending hospital during the COVID-19 pandemic
There are distinct groups of people who do feel safe and those who do not
Use of personal protective equipment, social distancing measures and cleaning are essential to supporting feelings of safety and are well supported
Recruitment to vaccine and COVID-19 studies presents challenges, especially amongst women and BAME respondents
Most people are very comfortable with new ways of working (i.e. remote/digital)
There is very strong support for continued health science research
Insight into the differences in perceptions and attitudes by individual risk status (due to age or comorbidity), sex and ethnicity.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No specific funding was granted for this piece of research. Staff was available through NIHR funding of the NIHR Leicester BRC.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
This research has been reviewed by the Medicine and Biological Sciences Research Ethics Committee of the University of Leicester (ref:26258-rp237-ls:healthsciences).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Paper in collection COVID-19 SARS-CoV-2 preprints from medRxiv and bioRxiv
The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, the Sergey Brin Family Foundation, California Institute of Technology, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Imperial College London, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, University of Washington, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
Subject Area
Reviews and Context
0
Comment
0
TRIP Peer Reviews
0
Community Reviews
0
Automated Services
0
Blogs/Media
Author Videos