A rapid review of measures to support people in isolation or quarantine during the Covid‐19 pandemic and the effectiveness of such measures

Abstract

​Summary This rapid review aimed to identify measures available to support those in isolation or quarantine during the coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid‐19) pandemic, and determine their effectiveness in improving adherence to these recommendations and or reducing transmission. The rapid review consisted of two elements, the first was a review of guidance published by national and international agencies relating to measures to support those in isolation (due to case status) or quarantine (due to close contact status) during the Covid‐19 pandemic. Five categories of support measures were identified in the international guidance, they were: Psychological, addiction and safety supports, Essential supplies, Financial aid, Information provision and Enforcement. The second element was a rapid literature review of the effectiveness of measures used to support individuals in isolation or quarantine during any pandemic or epidemic setting, due to respiratory pathogens. A systematic search of published peer‐reviewed articles and nonpeer‐reviewed pre‐prints was undertaken from 1 January 2000 to 26 January 2021. Two Australian publications met the inclusion criteria, both based on data from a survey undertaken during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic. The first reported that 55% of households were fully compliant with quarantine recommendations, and that there was increased compliance reported in households that understood what they were meant to do compared with those who reported that they did not (odds ratio [OR]: 2.27, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.35–3.80). The second reported that access to paid sick and or carer's leave did not predict compliance with quarantine recommendations (OR: 2.07, 95% CI: 0.82–5.23). Neither reported on reduction in transmission.

What is the effectiveness of financial support schemes for individuals requested to self-isolate following a positive Covid test or positive contact: A rapid review

“…A summary of the included reviews is provided in Table 1. Cardwell et al (2022) identified and assessed the effectiveness of measures to support people in isolation or quarantine during the COVID-19 pandemic, and reported on two primary studies (Kavanagh et al 2011, Kavanagh et al 2012). Patel et al (2021) evaluated the effectiveness of financial support interventions and reported on two studies (Bodas & Peleg 2020, Pichler et al 2020).…”

“…A systematic literature search was conducted between the 25 th – 29 th April 2022 across a range of databases for English language publications, and then 5 th −6 th May 2022 for ongoing trials and ongoing reviews. The searches were restricted to studies published after 1 st Jan 2021 as the rapid reviews by Cardwell et al (2022) and Patel et al (2021) undertook searches of the prior literature. The search databases and search dates are listed in table 5.…”

“…Preliminary scoping searches identified three reviews that were relevant to this review question: two rapid reviews (Cardwell et al 2022, Patel et al 2021) and one systematic review (Bahji et al 2021). A summary of the included reviews is provided in Table 1.…”

Effectiveness of rapid antigen testing for screening of asymptomatic individuals to limit the transmission of SARS‐CoV‐2: A rapid review

“… 32 , 38 , 42 Given uncertainty surrounding the clinical‐ and cost‐effectiveness of RADT‐based screening programmes, as well as their feasibility, it is important that the introduction of such programmes does not divert resources from other important health and social care services as this could exacerbate health inequalities. 32 , 54 …”

“…In the population‐level screening pilots conducted in Liverpool and South Wales, there was evidence of lower uptake rates in certain populations, such as those living in deprived areas, ethnic minorities, males and young people, and in those with the highest positivity rates 32,38,42 . Given uncertainty surrounding the clinical‐ and cost‐effectiveness of RADT‐based screening programmes, as well as their feasibility, it is important that the introduction of such programmes does not divert resources from other important health and social care services as this could exacerbate health inequalities 32,54 …”