Dataset Information

Public acceptability of COVID-19 control measures in Singapore, Hong Kong, and Malaysia: A cross-sectional survey.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Several countries have implemented control measures to limit SARS-CoV-2 spread, including digital contact tracing, digital monitoring of quarantined individuals, and testing of travelers. These raise ethical issues around privacy, personal freedoms, and equity. However, little is known regarding public acceptability of these measures.

Methods

In December 2020, we conducted a survey among 3635 respondents in Singapore, Hong Kong, and Malaysia to understand public perceptions on the acceptability of COVID-19 control measures.

Findings

Hong Kong respondents were much less supportive of digital contact tracing and monitoring devices than those in Malaysia and Singapore. Around three-quarters of Hong Kong respondents perceived digital contact tracing as an unreasonable restriction of individual freedom; <20% trusted that there were adequate local provisions preventing these data being used for other purposes. This was the opposite in Singapore, where nearly 3/4 of respondents agreed that there were adequate data protection rules locally. In contrast, only a minority of Hong Kong respondents viewed mandatory testing and vaccination for travelers as unreasonable infringements of privacy or freedom. Less than 2/3 of respondents in all territories were willing to be vaccinated against COVID-19, with a quarter of respondents undecided. However, support for differential travel restrictions for vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals was high in all settings.

Interpretation

Our findings highlight the importance of sociopolitical context in public perception of public health measures and emphasize the need to continually monitor public attitudes toward such measures to inform implementation and communication strategies.

SUBMITTER: Voo TC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9007749 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Public acceptability of COVID-19 control measures in Singapore, Hong Kong, and Malaysia: A cross-sectional survey.

Voo Teck Chuan TC Ballantyne Angela A Ng Chirk Jenn CJ Cowling Benjamin J BJ Xiao Jingyi J Phang Kean Chang KC Kaur Sharon S Jenarun Grazele G Kumar Vishakha V Lim Jane Mingjie JM Tun Zaw Myo ZM Wong Nigel Chong Boon NCB Tam Clarence C CC

International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases 20220414

<h4>Background</h4>Several countries have implemented control measures to limit SARS-CoV-2 spread, including digital contact tracing, digital monitoring of quarantined individuals, and testing of travelers. These raise ethical issues around privacy, personal freedoms, and equity. However, little is known regarding public acceptability of these measures.<h4>Methods</h4>In December 2020, we conducted a survey among 3635 respondents in Singapore, Hong Kong, and Malaysia to understand public percept ...[more]

PMID: 35430376

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionWHO's Integrated Care for Older People (ICOPE) proposes we measure the functional construct of intrinsic capacity (IC) to monitor and identify individuals with age-associated vulnerabilities. Assessments of IC may be useful to address the evolving, non-HV care needs of ageing people with HIV (PWH). However, to date, its utility within the context of HIV has not been assessed.MethodsParticipants included 200 PWH attending out-patient care (2021-2023) in Universiti Malaya Medical Centre, Malaysia and 101 community controls aged 35 years and above. The ICOPE framework was adapted to derive aggregate IC scores (ranging 0-6) encompassing the five domains of cognition, sensory (hearing and vision), mobility, mood and vitality. Multivariable analyses were used to explore the association of IC scores in PWH with multiple health outcomes including frailty, difficulties performing instrumental activities of daily living (IADL) and inflammatory markers. Area under the receiver operator characteristic (AUC-ROC) was calculated to predict frailty and IADL deficits in the current cohort and an independent cohort of 275 PWH from Hong Kong (HK).ResultsMedian (interquartile range, IQR) age among PWH and controls were 50 (42-56) and 50 (39-59) years, respectively. There were more males among PWH (83% vs. 56%, p<0.001). All PWH received antiretroviral therapy (ART) for a median duration of 11 (8-14) years. Aggregate IC scores were lower in PWH but not significantly different compared to controls, (5.4 vs. 5.6, p = 0.093) and PWH performed significantly worse than controls only in the cognitive domain. Aggregate IC scores in PWH was independently associated with frailty (OR 0.17 95% CI 0.07-0.42, p<0.001), IADL deficits (OR 0.25 95% CI 0.14-0.46, p<0.001) and all other patient-reported outcomes assessed. Aggregate IC scores correlated with IL-6 but not sCD14 and sCD163 levels. IC scores performed well in identifying PWH with frailty (AUC-ROC ≥ 0.80) in the HK and Malaysian cohorts but more modestly (AUC-ROC ≥ 0.64) for IADL deficits.ConclusionsIC is a good composite measure to monitor non-HIV, age-associated physical and social vulnerabilities in PWH on ART and should complement disease-based monitoring in routine HIV care. Assessments of IC should be validated in larger, longitudinal cohorts of PWH from diverse settings.

Project description:BackgroundHypertension is the most common chronic disease and is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Its screening, diagnosis, and management depend heavily on accurate blood pressure (BP) measurement. It is recommended that the diagnosis of hypertension should be confirmed or corroborated by out-of-office BP values, measured using ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) and home BP monitoring (HBPM). When office BP is used, automated office BP (AOBP) measurement method, which automatically provides an average of 3-5 BP readings, should be preferred. This study aimed to describe the BP measurement methods commonly used by doctors in primary care in Hong Kong, to screen, diagnose, and manage hypertensive patients.MethodsIn this cross-sectional survey, all doctors registered in the Hong Kong "Primary Care Directory" were mailed a questionnaire, asking their preferred BP-measuring methods to screen, diagnose, and manage hypertensive patients. Furthermore, we also elicited information on the usual number of office BP or HBPM readings obtained, to diagnose or manage hypertension.ResultsOf the 1738 doctors included from the directory, 445 responded. Manual measurement using a mercury or aneroid device was found to be the commonest method to screen (63.1%), diagnose (56.4%), and manage (72.4%) hypertension. There was a significant underutilisation of ABPM, with only 1.6% doctors using this method to diagnose hypertension. HBPM was used by 22.2% and 56.8% of the respondents to diagnose and manage hypertension, respectively. A quarter (26.7%) of the respondents reported using only one in-office BP reading, while around 40% participants reported using ≥12 HBPM readings. Doctors with specialist qualification in family medicine were more likely to use AOBP in clinics and to obtain the recommended number of office BP readings for diagnosis and management of hypertension.ConclusionPrimary Care doctors in Hong Kong prefer to use manual office BP values, measured using mercury or aneroid devices, to screen, diagnose, and manage hypertension, highlighting a marked underutilisation of AOBP and out-of-office BP measuring techniques, especially that of ABPM. Further studies are indicated to understand the underlying reasons and to minimise the gap between real-life clinical practice and those recommended, based on scientific advances.Trial registrationClinicaltrial.gov; ref. no.: NCT03926897.

Project description:BackgroundGiven the public health responses to previous respiratory disease pandemics, and in the absence of treatments and vaccines, the mitigation of the COVID-19 pandemic relies on population engagement in nonpharmaceutical interventions. This engagement is largely driven by risk perception, anxiety levels, and knowledge, as well as by historical exposure to disease outbreaks, government responses, and cultural factors.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to compare psychobehavioral responses in Hong Kong and the United Kingdom during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsComparable cross-sectional surveys were administered to adults in Hong Kong and the United Kingdom during the early phase of the epidemic in each setting. Explanatory variables included demographics, risk perception, knowledge of COVID-19, anxiety level, and preventive behaviors. Responses were weighted according to census data. Logistic regression models, including effect modification to quantify setting differences, were used to assess the association between the explanatory variables and the adoption of social distancing measures.ResultsData from 3431 complete responses (Hong Kong, 1663; United Kingdom, 1768) were analyzed. Perceived severity of symptoms differed by setting, with weighted percentages of 96.8% for Hong Kong (1621/1663) and 19.9% for the United Kingdom (366/1768). A large proportion of respondents were abnormally or borderline anxious (Hong Kong: 1077/1603, 60.0%; United Kingdom: 812/1768, 46.5%) and regarded direct contact with infected individuals as the transmission route of COVID-19 (Hong Kong: 94.0%-98.5%; United Kingdom: 69.2%-93.5%; all percentages weighted), with Hong Kong identifying additional routes. Hong Kong reported high levels of adoption of various social distancing measures (Hong Kong: 32.6%-93.7%; United Kingdom: 17.6%-59.0%) and mask-wearing (Hong Kong: 98.8% (1647/1663); United Kingdom: 3.1% (53/1768)). The impact of perceived severity of symptoms and perceived ease of transmission of COVID-19 on the adoption of social distancing measures varied by setting. In Hong Kong, these factors had no impact, whereas in the United Kingdom, those who perceived their symptom severity as "high" were more likely to adopt social distancing (adjusted odds ratios [aORs] 1.58-3.01), and those who perceived transmission as "easy" were prone to adopt both general social distancing (aOR 2.00, 95% CI 1.57-2.55) and contact avoidance (aOR 1.80, 95% CI 1.41-2.30). The impact of anxiety on adopting social distancing did not vary by setting.ConclusionsOur results suggest that health officials should ascertain baseline levels of risk perception and knowledge in populations, as well as prior sensitization to infectious disease outbreaks, during the development of mitigation strategies. Risk should be communicated through suitable media channels-and trust should be maintained-while early intervention remains the cornerstone of effective outbreak response.

Dataset Information

Public acceptability of COVID-19 control measures in Singapore, Hong Kong, and Malaysia: A cross-sectional survey.

Background

Methods

Findings

Interpretation

Publications

Public acceptability of COVID-19 control measures in Singapore, Hong Kong, and Malaysia: A cross-sectional survey.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets