Institute of Mental Health Sciences, School of Health Sciences, Ulster University, Newtownabbey, United Kingdom.
School of Health Sciences, Ulster University, Newtownabbey, United Kingdom.
PLoS One. 2021 Dec 8;16(12):e0260919. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0260919. eCollection 2021.
In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, most countries have introduced non-pharmaceutical interventions, such as stay-at-home orders, to reduce person-to-person contact and break trains of transmission. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effect of different public health restrictions on mobility across different countries and cultures. The University of Bern COVID-19 Living Evidence database of COVID-19 and SARS-COV-2 publications was searched for retrospective or prospective studies evaluating the impact of COVID-19 public health restrictions on Google Mobility. Titles and abstracts were independently screened by two authors. Information from included studies was extracted by one researcher and double checked by another. Risk of bias of included articles was assessed using the Newcastle Ottowa Scale. Given the heterogeneous nature of the designs used, a narrative synthesis was undertaken. From the search, 1672 references were identified, of which 14 were included in the narrative synthesis. All studies reported data from the first wave of the pandemic, with Google Mobility Scores included from January to August 2020, with most studies analysing data during the first two months of the pandemic. Seven studies were assessed as having a moderate risk of bias and seven as a low risk of bias. Countries that introduced more stringent public health restrictions experienced greater reductions in mobility, through increased time at home and reductions in visits to shops, workplaces and use of public transport. Stay-at-home orders were the most effective of the individual strategies, whereas mask mandates had little effect of mobility.
Public health restrictions, particularly stay-at-home orders have significantly impacted on transmission prevention behaviours. Further research is required to understand how to effectively address pandemic fatigue and to support the safe return back to normal day-to-day behaviours.
为应对 COVID-19 大流行，大多数国家都采取了非药物干预措施，如居家令，以减少人际接触并阻断传播链。本系统评价的目的是评估不同国家和文化的不同公共卫生限制措施对流动性的影响。伯尔尼大学 COVID-19 生活证据数据库中 COVID-19 和 SARS-COV-2 的出版物被用于检索评估 COVID-19 公共卫生限制对谷歌流动性影响的回顾性或前瞻性研究。标题和摘要由两位作者独立筛选。纳入研究的信息由一位研究人员提取，另一位研究人员进行双重检查。使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表评估纳入文章的偏倚风险。鉴于所使用设计的异质性，进行了叙述性综合。从搜索中，确定了 1672 篇参考文献，其中 14 篇被纳入叙述性综合。所有研究都报告了大流行第一波的数据，谷歌流动性得分包括 2020 年 1 月至 8 月的数据，大多数研究分析了大流行前两个月的数据。有 7 项研究被评估为中度偏倚风险，7 项研究为低偏倚风险。采取更严格公共卫生限制措施的国家，通过增加在家时间和减少对商店、工作场所和公共交通工具的使用，经历了更大的流动性下降。居家令是最有效的单项策略，而口罩强制令对流动性的影响很小。
公共卫生限制措施，特别是居家令，对预防传播行为产生了重大影响。需要进一步研究如何有效应对大流行疲劳，并支持安全回归正常的日常行为。
