Public perceptions and experiences of social distancing and social isolation during the COVID-19 pandemic: a UK-based focus group study

Simon N Williams, Christopher J Armitage, Tova Tampe, Kimberly Dienes, Simon N Williams, Christopher J Armitage, Tova Tampe, Kimberly Dienes

Abstract

Objective: This study explored UK public perceptions and experiences of social distancing and social isolation related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Design: This qualitative study comprised five focus groups, carried out online during the early stages of the UK's stay at home order ('lockdown'), and analysed using a thematic approach.

Setting: Focus groups took place via online videoconferencing.

Participants: Participants (n=27) were all UK residents aged 18 years and older, representing a range of gender, ethnic, age and occupational backgrounds.

Results: Qualitative analysis revealed four main themes: (1) loss-participants' loss of (in-person) social interaction, loss of income and loss of structure and routine led to psychological and emotional 'losses' such as loss of motivation, loss of meaning and loss of self-worth; (2) criticisms of government communication-participants reported a lack of trust in government and a lack of clarity in the guidelines around social distancing and isolation; (3) adherence-participants reported high self-adherence to social distancing guidelines but reported seeing or hearing of non-adherence in others; (4) uncertainty around social reintegration and the future-some participants felt they would have lingering concerns over social contact while others were eager to return to high levels of social activity.Most participants, and particularly those in low-paid or precarious employment, reported feeling that the social distancing and isolation associated with COVID-19 policy has had negative impacts on their mental health and well-being during the early stages of the UK's 'lockdown'.

Conclusions: A rapid response is necessary in terms of public health programming to mitigate the mental health impacts of COVID-19 social distancing and isolation. Social distancing and isolation 'exit strategies' must account for the fact that, although some individuals will voluntarily or habitually continue to socially distance, others will seek high levels of social engagement as soon as possible.

Keywords: mental health; public health; qualitative research.

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

References

    1. Prime Ministers’ Office PM statement on coronavirus. Available:
    1. Ferguson N, Laydon D, Nedjati-Gilani G. Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to reduce COVID-19 mortality and healthcare demand, 2020.
    1. Williams SN. ‘Plausible uncertainty’: The negotiated indeterminacy of pandemic influenza in the UK. Crit Public Health 2008;18:77–85. 10.1080/09581590701877241
    1. National Health Service (NHS) UK Guidance on social distancing. Available: [Accessed 20 Mar 2020].
    1. Holmes EA, O'Connor RC, Perry VH, et al. . Multidisciplinary research priorities for the COVID-19 pandemic: a call for action for mental health science. Lancet Psychiatry 2020;7:547–60. 10.1016/S2215-0366(20)30168-1
    1. Brooks SK, Webster RK, Smith LE, et al. . The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence. The Lancet 2020;395:912–20. 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30460-8
    1. Teasdale E, Santer M, Geraghty AWA, et al. . Public perceptions of non-pharmaceutical interventions for reducing transmission of respiratory infection: systematic review and synthesis of qualitative studies. BMC Public Health 2014;14:589. 10.1186/1471-2458-14-589
    1. Baum NM, Jacobson PD, Goold SD. "Listen to the people": public deliberation about social distancing measures in a pandemic. Am J Bioeth 2009;9:4–14. 10.1080/15265160903197531
    1. Akan H, Gurol Y, Izbirak G, et al. . Knowledge and attitudes of university students toward pandemic influenza: a cross-sectional study from turkey. BMC Public Health 2010;10:ar412. 10.1186/1471-2458-10-413
    1. Mitchell T, Dee DL, Phares CR, et al. . Non-pharmaceutical interventions during an outbreak of 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) virus infection at a large public University, April-May 2009. Clin Infect Dis 2011;52 Suppl 1:S138–45. 10.1093/cid/ciq056
    1. Geldsetzer P. Knowledge and perceptions of COVID-19 among the general public in the United States and the United Kingdom: a cross-sectional online survey. Ann Intern Med 2020:M20-0912. 10.7326/M20-0912
    1. Tates K, Zwaanswijk M, Otten R, et al. . Online focus groups as a tool to collect data in hard-to-include populations: examples from paediatric oncology. BMC Med Res Methodol 2009;9:ar15. 10.1186/1471-2288-9-15
    1. Williams SN. A twenty-first century Citizens’ POLIS: introducing a democratic experiment in electronic citizen participation in science and technology decision-making. Public Underst Sci 2010;19:528–44. 10.1177/0963662509104726
    1. Mays N, Pope C. Rigour and qualitative research. BMJ 1995;311:109–12. 10.1136/bmj.311.6997.109
    1. Kitzinger J. Qualitative research. introducing focus groups. BMJ 1995;311:299–302. 10.1136/bmj.311.7000.299
    1. Barbour R, Kitzinger J. Developing focus group research: Politics, theory and practice. London: Sage, 1999.
    1. Silverman D. Qualitative research: theory, method and practice. London: Sage, 1997.
    1. Coffey A, Atkinson P. Making Sense of Qualitative Data. London: Sage, 1996.
    1. Albrecht T, Johnson G, Walther J. Understanding communication processes in focus groups, in D Morgan (ED.) successful focus groups: advancing the state of the art. London: Sage, 1993.
    1. Stewart K, Williams M. Researching online populations: the use of online focus groups for social research. Qualitative Research 2005;5:395–416. 10.1177/1468794105056916
    1. National Health Service (NHS) UK Advice for everyone: coronavirus (COVID-19). Available: [Accessed 24 Mar 2020].
    1. van Boekel LC, Peek ST, Luijkx KG. Diversity in older adults' use of the Internet: identifying subgroups through latent class analysis. J Med Internet Res 2017;19:e180. 10.2196/jmir.6853
    1. Ryan R, Patrick H, Deci E, et al. . Facilitating health behaviour change and its maintenance: interventions based on Self-Determination theory. The Eur Health Psychol 2008;10:2–6.
    1. Rushton K, Fraser C, Gellatly J, et al. . A case of misalignment: the perspectives of local and national decision-makers on the implementation of psychological treatment by telephone in the improving access to psychological therapies service. BMC Health Serv Res 2019;19:997. 10.1186/s12913-019-4824-4

Source: PubMed

Sponsorit ja yhteistyökumppanit

Sairaudet

Huumeiden interventiot

3
Tilaa