Public perspectives on protective measures during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Netherlands, Germany and Italy: A survey study

Abstract

Background The extent to which people implement government-issued protective measures is critical in preventing further spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. Our study aimed to describe the public belief in the effectiveness of protective measures, the reported implementation of these measures, and to identify communication channels used to acquire information on COVID-19 in European countries during the early stage of the pandemic. Methods and findings An online survey available in multiple languages was disseminated starting on March 19th, 2020. After five days, we computed descriptive statistics for countries with more than 500 respondents. Each day, we assessed enacted community containment measures by stage of stringency (I-IV). In total, 9,796 adults responded, of whom 8,611 resided in the Netherlands (stage III), 604 in Germany (stage III), and 581 in Italy (stage IV). To explore possible dynamics as containment strategies intensified, we also included 1,365 responses submitted during the following week. Participants indicated support for governmental measures related to avoiding social gatherings, selective closure of public places, and hand hygiene and respiratory measures (range for all measures: 95.0%-99.7%). Respondents from the Netherlands less frequently considered a complete social lockdown effective (59.2%), compared to respondents in Germany (76.6%) or Italy (87.2%). Italian residents applied enforced social distancing measures more frequently (range: 90.2%-99.3%, German and Dutch residents: 67.5%-97.0%) and self-initiated hygienic and social distancing behaviors (range: 36.3%-96.6%, German and Dutch residents: 28.3%-95.7%). Respondents reported being sufficiently informed about the outbreak and behaviors to avoid infection (range: 90.2%-91.1%). Information channels most commonly reported included television newspapers, official health websites, and social media. One week later, we observed no major differences in submitted responses. Conclusions During the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic, belief in the effectiveness of protective measures among survey respondents from three European countries was high and participants reported feeling sufficiently informed. In March 2020, implementation of measures differed between countries and were highest among respondents from Italy, who were subjected to the most stringent lockdown measures and greatest COVID-19 burden in Europe during this period.

Predictors of misconceptions, knowledge, attitudes, and practices of COVID-19 pandemic among a sample of Saudi population

“…Our results are similar to another study [ 15 ]. Meier et al also reported that television, newspapers, official health websites, and SM were the most frequently used information sources [ 16 ]. SM has extensive “health misinformation," often described as information that contradicts existing evidence from medical specialists [ 17 ].…”

“…The practice score ranged from 0 to 12 (yes = 2 points, sometimes = 1, and no = 0), and a score of �6 was considered adequate while <6 was considered inadequate. The misconception questions score ranged from 1 to 19 (correct [true] answer = 1 score, wrong [false] answer = 0 score, not sure = 0 score) and scores �50% (1-9) were considered to be poor concepts, and individuals with a >50% score (10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19) were considered high scorers, indicated good concepts.…”

COVID-19 in Germany and China: mitigation versus elimination strategy

“…The measures taken by the German government were largely accepted by the population, the number of cases declined steadily and stayed low during the summer months ( Figure 3 ). Other factors likely to have contributed include an intense broad and science-oriented information and discussion of national and international epidemic developments in the German media, and an active and unified political leadership [ 55 ]. The warm and dry weather during summer, which allowed for outdoor social activities, probably contributed to keeping case load low [ 16 , 56 ].…”

Effectiveness of the non-pharmaceutical public health interventions against COVID-19; a protocol of a systematic review and realist review

“…This example indicates the role of political and social context in the success of a PHI [30]. Effectiveness of a non-pharmaceutical PHI is tailored to changing the behavior of the target population [31,32]. That is, if people change their behavior in a way to follow preventive measures in COVID-19 pandemics, the spread of the disease will slow down; and at this regard, there are some theories that explain the behavior change mechanism in the real world.…”