4.6 Article

Association between COVID-19 infection rates by region and implementation of non-pharmaceutical interventions: a cross-sectional study in Japan

期刊

JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH
卷 45, 期 1, 页码 229-236

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdab385

关键词

COVID-19; public health; non-pharmaceutical interventions

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In Japan, the regional infection rates of COVID-19 are associated with the adherence to non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) among individuals. This study found that NPIs were more prevalent in regions with higher incidence rates of COVID-19.
Background During a pandemic, non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) play an important role in protecting oneself and others from infection. There are large regional differences in COVID-19 infection rates in Japan. We hypothesized that the local infection incidence may affect adherence to individual NPIs. Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted online among full-time workers in Japan in December 2020. The questionnaire asked the respondents to identify their habits regarding seven common NPIs (wearing masks, washing hands after the bathroom, disinfecting hands when entering indoors, gargling when returning home, ventilating the room, disinfecting or washing hands after touching frequently touched surfaces, carrying alcohol sanitizers when outdoors). Results A total of 27 036 participants were analyzed. Compared with the region with the lowest infection rate, five of the seven NPIs showed statistically significant trends across regional infection levels, the two exceptions being wearing masks and washing hands after the bathroom. Multivariate adjustment did not change these trends. Conclusions This study found that NPIs were more prevalent in regions with higher incidence rates of COVID-19 in Japanese workers. The findings suggest that the implementation of NPIs was influenced not only by personal attributes but also by contextual effects of the local infection level.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据