Latest news with #CovidHealthandAdherenceResearchinScotland
STV News
23-04-2025
- Health
- STV News
Local restrictions 'did not alter behaviour' during Covid pandemic
People did not alter their behaviour to follow enhanced local restrictions during the pandemic, according to new research from the University of Aberdeen. The study published in Translational Behavioral Medicine looked at people's behaviour during the Covid-19 pandemic in Scotland. It suggested the rules may have been more effective if based around factors other than just Covid-19 cases. The team examined adherence to restrictions introduced during the pandemic including social distancing, mask-wearing, staying at home and hand washing. They compared people's behaviours before and after local restrictions were implemented. They also compared behaviours of those living in areas with increased restrictions to those living in areas without. Results showed that people did not change their behaviour when restrictions were tightened and that applied to all behaviours including social distancing and mask wearing. They also found people in high or low restriction areas behaved no differently to each other. Led by Dr Chantal den Daas, senior lecturer in Health Psychology, in collaboration with the Covid Health and Adherence Research in Scotland (CHARIS) project, the team interviewed individuals across Scotland at random from March to November 2020, to get a representative sample of the Scottish population. The respondents answered questions about their behaviours from the past week, including if they had left their home, if they had adhered to the two-metre social distancing rule, if they had worn a mask in a shop or on public transport and if they washed their hands as soon as they got home. Dr den Daas said: 'When local restrictions were introduced in 2020 due to an increase in Covid-19 case numbers, we thought we would see a change in behaviour after they were implemented. But this was not what we found. 'It is really important to build an understanding of what could have been done differently and how we can effectively influence public behaviour in the future should we be faced with another public health crisis. 'This research provided insight on the type of information we should aim to collect in future pandemics, to see if we can find better measures to predict cases, examine the need for restrictions and the effect of any restrictions put in place. 'Future research in acute outbreaks should assess behaviour and beliefs about the virus, risk on an ongoing basis and identify the need for intervention even before cases rates start to go up.' Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country
Western Telegraph
22-04-2025
- Health
- Western Telegraph
Regional Covid-19 restrictions ‘did not change behaviour' during 2020
Researchers from the University of Aberdeen examined adherence to restrictions including social distancing, mask-wearing, staying at home and handwashing, and found people in high or low restriction areas behaved no differently to each other. The study, published in the US journal Translational Behavioral Medicine, looked at behaviour during the Covid-19 pandemic in Scotland from March to November 2020, with 1724 people interviewed at random to get a representative sample. People did not alter behaviour to follow enhanced local restrictions during the pandemic, the study found, and the restrictions may have been more effective if based around factors other than just coronavirus cases according to new research. The study compared people's behaviours before and after local restrictions, and compared behaviours of those living in areas with increased restrictions to those living in areas without. Different levels of restrictions were in place in different areas of Scotland during parts of the pandemic (Andrew Milligan/PA) People did not change their behaviour when restrictions were tightened, including social distancing and mask wearing, defying scientists' expectations, research showed. It also found people in high or low restriction areas behaved no differently to each other, and examined 'intention and self-efficacy'. Intention and self-efficacy related to keeping a 2.0 metre distance was assessed by asking: 'Do you intend to follow all the government instructions…' and 'How confident or not are you that you can follow the government instructions…' graded on a scale, according to the report. The respondents answered questions about their behaviours from the past week, including if they had left home, had adhered to the social distancing rule, worn a mask in a shop or on public transport and if they washed their hands as soon as they got home. This research provided insight on the type of information we should aim to collect in future pandemics Dr Chantal den Daas, University of Aberdeen Dr Chantal den Daas, senior lecturer in health psychology, in collaboration with the Covid Health and Adherence Research in Scotland (Charis) project, said the research 'can effectively influence public behaviour' in the future. She said: 'When local restrictions were introduced in 2020 due to an increase in Covid-19 case numbers, we thought we would see a change in behaviour after they were implemented. But this was not what we found. 'It is really important to build an understanding of what could have been done differently and how we can effectively influence public behaviour in the future should we be faced with another public health crisis. 'This research provided insight on the type of information we should aim to collect in future pandemics, to see if we can find better measures to predict cases, examine the need for restrictions and the effect of any restrictions put in place. 'Future research in acute outbreaks should assess behaviour and beliefs about the virus, risk on an ongoing basis and identify the need for intervention even before cases rates start to go up.'
The Herald Scotland
22-04-2025
- Health
- The Herald Scotland
Research finds Scot Covid restrictions had no impact on distancing
Findings also suggested that the local restrictions may have been more effective if factors other than Covid-19 cases had been considered. Project leader Dr Chantal den Daas, a Senior Lecturer in Health Psychology, said the study provides insight into how to approach future pandemics, especially in terms of what information should be established prior to imposing restrictions. In collaboration with the Covid Health and Adherence Research in Scotland (CHARIS) project, Dr den Daas and her team interviewed individuals across Scotland at random from March to November 2020. Respondents were asked whether they had worn masks in shops and on public transport, left their homes, followed two-metre social distancing rules, and washed their hands as soon as they returned home. The study distinguished between 'restrictions' such as lockdowns that included curfews, closure of shops, bars, restaurants and sporting events, and stay at home rules, and guidance around individual behaviours such as physical distancing, hand washing, and wearing face coverings Although many of the restrictions and guidance were used around the world during the pandemic, researchers said there is a 'lack of understanding' about when to implement restrictions and how likely they are to slow transmission. Researchers compared people's behaviour before and after local restrictions were implemented, and the results were also compared across regions. Although the study found that people were no more likely to adhere to social distancing in regions with local restrictions, there were signs that people were more likely to wear face coverings in areas with looser or no restrictions. The authors also suggested that future research should try to determine whether case rates are the right factor to use for triggering restrictions. Because the presence of local restrictions did not appear to change respondents' behaviours, the authors recommended that 'policymakers should consider communicating more clearly on reasons for the restrictions.' In summarising the results, the authors said that effectively communicating not only the need but also the reasons for following restrictions is vital. Still, they conceded that 'increasing targeted behaviours is not easy.' Although the Aberdeen study focused on the impact of local restrictions, the report pointed to previous studies that showed that national policies—such as national restrictions on face covering and staying at home—did make it more likely for people to follow the rules. Dr den Daas said that the study's results contradict expectations and provide useful insight into how to respond to future outbreaks. 'When local restrictions were introduced in 2020 due to an increase in Covid-19 case numbers, we thought we would see a change in behaviour after they were implemented. But this was not what we found. 'It is really important to build an understanding of what could have been done differently and how we can effectively influence public behaviour in the future should we be faced with another public health crisis. 'This research provided insight on the type of information we should aim to collect in future pandemics, to see if we can find better measures to predict cases, examine the need for restrictions and the effect of any restrictions put in place. 'Future research in acute outbreaks should assess behaviour and beliefs about the virus, risk on an ongoing basis and identify the need for intervention even before cases rates start to go up.'
Telegraph
22-04-2025
- Health
- Telegraph
Public ‘ignored' Scotland's Covid restrictions, study suggests
Restrictions imposed by Nicola Sturgeon to contain the spread of Covid in Scotland were largely ignored by the public, a study suggests. Ms Sturgeon, who was first minister when the pandemic broke out in March 2020, attempted to restrict people's movements and limit physical contact with social distancing and enforcement measures that included staying at home. Later, a complex and often confusing five-tier system was introduced that resulted in different local authorities being placed in different tiers. According to a study by the University of Aberdeen, which examined adherence to restrictions including social distancing, mask-wearing, staying at home and handwashing, many people did not alter their behaviour to follow enhanced local restrictions during the pandemic. The research suggests that the restrictions may have been more effective if based around factors other than just coronavirus cases. The study, published in the US journal Translational Behavioral Medicine, looked at behaviour during the Covid-19 pandemic in Scotland from March to November 2020, with 1,724 people interviewed at random to get a representative sample. It analysed people's behaviour before and after local restrictions, and compared behaviours of those living in areas with increased restrictions with those living in areas without. The study also examined 'intention and self-efficacy' and graded people's intention – and confidence – in following government instructions such as maintaining a two-metre distance from others. The respondents answered questions about their behaviours from the past week, including if they had left home, had adhered to the social distancing rule, worn a mask in a shop or on public transport and if they washed their hands as soon as they got home. Dr Chantal den Daas, senior lecturer in health psychology, in collaboration with the Covid Health and Adherence Research in Scotland project, said the research 'can effectively influence public behaviour' in the future. She said: 'When local restrictions were introduced in 2020 due to an increase in Covid-19 case numbers, we thought we would see a change in behaviour after they were implemented. But this was not what we found. 'It is really important to build an understanding of what could have been done differently and how we can effectively influence public behaviour in the future should we be faced with another public health crisis. 'This research provided insight on the type of information we should aim to collect in future pandemics, to see if we can find better measures to predict cases, examine the need for restrictions and the effect of any restrictions put in place. 'Future research in acute outbreaks should assess behaviour and beliefs about the virus, risk on an ongoing basis and identify the need for intervention even before cases rates start to go up.' Under the Scottish tier system, which did not come into force until the start of November 2020, the three middle tiers were broadly similar to the English system, where areas were classed as either 'medium', 'high' or 'very high' risk. The top level was tougher than the highest of England's three tiers and included strict controls on travelling. A lower level in Scotland applied to areas with fewer Covid-19 cases and allowed more freedoms than other parts of the country where infection rates were higher.
