Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

F1000Research, Wellcome Open Research, (6), p. 116, 2021

DOI: 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.16785.1

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Limits of lockdown: characterising essential contacts during strict physical distancing

This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Red circle
Preprint: archiving forbidden
Red circle
Postprint: archiving forbidden
Green circle
Published version: archiving allowed
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has exposed health inequalities within countries and globally. The fundamental determining factor behind an individual’s risk of infection is the number of social contacts they make. In many countries, physical distancing measures have been implemented to control transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), reducing social contacts to a minimum. We characterise social contacts to understand the drivers and inequalities behind differential risks for aiding in planning SARS-CoV-2 mitigation programmes. Methods: We utilised an existing longitudinal birth cohort (n=6807) to explore social contact patterns and behaviours when strict physical distancing measures were in place during the UK’s first lockdown in March-May 2020. We used an online questionnaire to capture information on participant contact patterns, health, SARS-CoV-2 exposure, behaviours and impacts resulting from COVID-19. We quantified daily contacts and examined the association between covariates and numbers of daily total contacts using a negative binomial regression model. Results: A daily average of 3.7 [standard deviation = 10.6] total contacts outside the household were reported. Essential workers, specifically those in healthcare, had 4.5 times as many contacts as non-essential workers [incident rate ratio = 4.42 (95% CI: 3.88–5.04)], whilst essential workers in other sectors, mainly teaching and the police force had three times as many contacts [IRR = 2.84 (2.58–3.13)]. The number of individuals in a household, which largely reflects number of children, increases essential social contacts by 40%. Self-isolation effectively reduces numbers of contacts outside of the home, but not entirely. Conclusions: Contextualising contact patterns has highlighted the health inequalities exposed by COVID-19, as well as potential sources of infection risk and transmission. Together, these findings will aid the interpretation of epidemiological data and impact the design of effective control strategies for SARS-CoV-2, such as vaccination, testing and contact tracing.