Abstract
Objectives The January 2020 outbreak of coronavirus has once again thrown the vexed issue of quarantine into the spotlight, with many countries asking their citizens to ‘self-isolate’ if they have potentially come into contact with the infection. However, adhering to quarantine is difficult. Decisions on how to apply quarantine should be based on the best available evidence to increase the likelihood of people adhering to protocols. We conducted a rapid review to identify factors associated with adherence to quarantine during infectious disease outbreaks.
Study design Rapid evidence review.
Methods We searched Medline, PsycINFO and Web of Science for published literature on the reasons for and factors associated with adherence to quarantine during an infectious disease outbreak.
Results We found 3163 papers and included 14 in the review. Adherence to quarantine ranged from as little as 0 up to 92.8%. The main factors which influenced or were associated with adherence decisions were the knowledge people had about the disease and quarantine procedure, social norms, perceived benefits of quarantine and perceived risk of the disease, as well as practical issues such as running out of supplies or the financial consequences of being out of work.
Conclusions People vary in their adherence to quarantine during infectious disease outbreaks. To improve this, public health officials should provide a timely, clear rationale for quarantine and information about protocols; emphasise social norms to encourage this altruistic behaviour; increase the perceived benefit that engaging in quarantine will have on public health; and ensure that sufficient supplies of food, medication and other essentials are provided.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The research was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Emergency Preparedness and Response at King’s College London in partnership with Public Health England (PHE), in collaboration with the University of East Anglia and Newcastle University. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, the Department of Health and Social Care or Public Health England.
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.
Yes
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
Footnotes
Addresses and positions Rebecca K Webster: King’s College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Department of Psychological Medicine, Weston Education Centre, Cutcombe Road, London, SE5 9RJ, UK, Email: Rebecca.webster{at}kcl.ac.uk, Phone: +44 20 7848 5686, Post-Doctoral Research Associate
Samantha K Brooks: King’s College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Department of Psychological Medicine, Weston Education Centre, Cutcombe Road, London, SE5 9RJ, UK, Post-Doctoral Research Worker
Louise E Smith: King’s College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Department of Psychological Medicine, Weston Education Centre, Cutcombe Road, London, SE5 9RJ, UK, Post-Doctoral Research Associate
Lisa Woodland: King’s College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Department of Psychological Medicine, Weston Education Centre, Cutcombe Road, London, SE5 9RJ, UK, PhD Student
Simon Wessely: King’s College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Department of Psychological Medicine, Weston Education Centre, Cutcombe Road, London, SE5 9RJ, UK, Regius Professor of Psychiatry
G James Rubin: King’s College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Department of Psychological Medicine, Weston Education Centre, Cutcombe Road, London, SE5 9RJ, UK, Reader in the Psychology of Emerging Health Risks
Funding The research was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit (NIHR HPRU) in Emergency Preparedness and Response at King’s College London in partnership with Public Health England (PHE), in collaboration with the University of East Anglia and Newcastle University. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, the Department of Health and Social Care or Public Health England.
Competing interests None declared.
Ethical approval Not required – review.
Role of the funding source The sponsor and funder of the study had no role in study design, analysis, interpretation, or writing of the report. The corresponding author had full access to all the data in the study and had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.
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.