Abstract
Background Local outbreak control plans (LOCPs) are statutory documents produced by local authorities (LAs) across England. LOCPs outlines LAs’ response to COVID-19 outbreaks and the coordination of local resources, data, and communication to support outbreak response. LOCPs are therefore crucial in the nation’s response to COVID-19. However, there has been no previous systematic assessment of these documents. We performed this study to systematically assess the quality of LOCPs and offer recommendations of good practice.
Methods All published LOCPs were assessed for basic characteristics. A framework based on Department of Health and Social Care guidelines was used to assess a random sample of LOCPs. Qualitative analysis was undertaken for LOCPs with highest completeness.
Results 137 of 150 LAs publicly published a full LOCP; nine were drafts. Statistical analysis demonstrated significant difference between reporting of mainstream schools, care homes, and the homeless population and other educational settings, high-risk settings, and other vulnerable groups. LOCPs varied in approach when structuring outbreak response information and focussed on different areas of outbreak management.
Conclusions The majority of LAs are publicly accessible. There is significant variation between the reporting of high-risk settings and groups. Suggested recommendations may help to improve future LOCP updates.
Competing Interest Statement
All the others apart from M.L. work in a County Council Public Health Department.
Funding Statement
No external funding was received for this work.
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:
No direct patient identifiable data was used in this work.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.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
Data Availability
The data underlying this article are available in the article and in its online supplementary material.
