The impact of health promotion response to the current Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic among generation population in United Kingdom
The impact of health promotion response to the current Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic among generation population in United Kingdom
Background
The coronavirus disease which is responsible for the current COVID-19 pandemic is known to be caused by the SARS-CoV-2, a positive stranded RNA virus that infects an organism primarily by invading the epithelial cells of the lungs through its spike glycoproteins (Kang and Xu, 2020; Oboh et al., 2021). Therefore, the major route of exposure to this virus is through the airways and can be contracted through respiratory particles of an infected patient as the virus are found suspended in such particles (Karia et al., 2020). Initially, it was thought not to be airborne and patients get infected from contact with contaminated surfaces or release of respiratory particles within two-meter distance (Chai et al., 2020). However, further scientific studies showed the possibility of the virus being airborne. Nevertheless, this has not received global scientific approval and hence the World Health Organization (WHO) still not giving clear directive of it being airborne. Nevertheless, the general acceptable guideline still considers contact with contaminated surfaces and infected respiratory particles within a two-meter radius as the most effective exposure opportunities.
Undoubtedly, the COVID-19 pandemic caused several disruptions to several sectors across different nations. Particularly in the UK, the series of containment strategies including isolations, lockdowns and travel restrictions among others brought severe disruptions to the health, economic and social sectors. It has therefore become imperative to evaluate the degree of influence of the pandemic on human daily activities, and the various responses to counteract such disruptions. Consequently, this review will evaluate studies on the impact of health promotion responses to the COVID 19 pandemic in the UK (Keyworth et al., 2021; Gov.UK, 2022).
According to WHO, health promotion generally involves promoting peoples wellbeing and reducing their risk to diseases and thus contribute to improving public health (WHO, 2022). This is achieved through but not limited to developing and executing wide range of health promoting activities, creating fiscal and legal frameworks to support health promotion and improving human capacity development (WHO 1986). Health promotion is anchored on five implementation pillars which are; building healthy public policies, creating supportive environments for health; strengthening community action for health, developing personal skills and re-orientating health services (WHO, 1986; WHO, 2020). The global response to the COVID-19 pandemic are divers and multidimensional. At the peak of the pandemic in the UK, there was initial total travel restrictions within and outside the UK, lockdown measures were put in place, aggressive contact tracing were implemented for those who had come in contact with infected persons, wearing of nose masks and social distancing were enforced in public places, ban was instituted on mass gathering among others. All these interventions which can be categorized under one or more action plan of health promotion were periodically reviewed as the pandemic progresses. For example, complete lockdown metamorphosed to travel corridors, compulsory testing as condition for mobility and later vaccination certificates (GOV.UK, 2022). Generally as the pandemic subsided, most of the initial regulations were relaxed in exchange for mass campaign for vaccination. While these health promotion interventions were adjudged successful in some quarters (at least owing to the reduction in rate of infection), there were uproars in other quarters as to the untold economic hardship, other health challenges and human right violations some of these interventions brought (Aragona et al., 2020; Spiro et al., 2021; Plzkov and Smeral, 2021). For example, there are evidences that suggest that public health interventions occasioned as a result of the COVID 19 pandemic adversely affected availability of healthcare for other diseases such as cardiovascular diseases and cancer in the UK (Mattioli et al., 2020; Maringe et al., 2020; Rutter et al.,2021). Therefore, this review will systematically evaluate the pros and cons of the various health promotion interventions geared at mitigating the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, this review will focus on systematic review of interventions plans against the pandemic that falls within the five action plans of health promotion as outlined in the Ottawa Chatter of 1986 (WHO, 1986, WHO, 2022). The outcome of this review hoped to present the gains of this health promotion interventions against the pandemic, while recommendations will be given on the short-comings of current health promotion interventions against the pandemic to strengthen future public health responses.
This review will cover the entire UK population. By the general UK population, it means everyone that were living in the UK (both indigenes and foreigners) with status that enables them to access basic health services during the peak period of the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2020-December 2021). It is important to define the population scope of this review in order to properly achieve the aim of evaluating the health promotion response to COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. Therefore, UK citizens who were not living in the UK within the defined study time (March, 2020-December, 2021) will be excluded from the population definition of UK general population.
Research Question
What are the impacts of health promotion response to the current Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic among the general population in the United Kingdom?
PECO Analysis
Population: General population in the United Kingdom during the peak period of the COVID-19 pandemic (March, 2020- December, 2021) this include both indigenes of the UK and foreigners who lived in the UK within this time period. UK citizens outside the UK within this time periods are not included.
Exposure: In contact with respiratory particles (droplets and aerosol) from infected person and or contaminated surfaces. SARS-CoV2, the viral pathogen of the coronavirus disease is reportedly transmitted via exposure to infected respiratory particles (Karia et al., 2020).
Comparison: This review will compare the pros and cons of the five health promotion interventions in mitigating the COVID-19 pandemic.
Outcome: Reduced burden on the health system.
Study Design and Method
Study Design
This review will carry out a descriptive analysis of the various health promotion interventions against the COVID 19 pandemic in the UK. Specifically, it will describe the comparative effect of the pros and cons of these interventions. As a descriptive analysis, this review will describe, illustrate and carry out narrative synthesis of available information on the influence of health promotions on COVID 19 pandemic in the UK with an aim of compare, combine and integrate different relevant studies with the aim to forming an adequate conclusion and/or recommendation. In achieving this, a quasi-systematic review will be carried out. A quasi-systematic review is a type of review that has a carefully and clearly crafted research question which is supported by relevant scientific studies (Khan et al. 2003; Kitchenham, 2004). Also, a quasi-systemic review carries out evaluation and summation of available information in the studies using well defined methodology (Khan et al., 2003; Kitchenham, 2004). This review will be conducted following the five step guidelines on conducting a systemic review as described by Khan et al., (2003) and Kitchenham, (2004). These includes, identification of research question, study selection, assessment of quality of study resources, data extraction and synthesis, as well as reporting of findings.
Research Methods
The Coronavirus (COVID-19) caused by the SARS-Cov2 virus is a respiratory infection that caused major global disruption and officially acknowledged as a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO) in February, 2020. This current pandemic has affected the United Kingdom with extended lockdowns and socioeconomic disruptions including extended strains on the NHS in the UK. Various health promotion strategies have been employed in the UK till date in combating the pandemic. For example, under creating supportive environments for health promotion action plan, strategies such as lock downs, promoting personal protection for frontline health workers of the NHS, isolation centers, contact tracing, travel restrictions and more recently vaccinations have been employed in the UK (Gov.uk, 2022). Furthermore, under the developing personal skills, the general populace has been encouraged and sometimes enforced to maintain social distances, avoid mass gatherings and unnecessary travels as well as healthy diets, personal hygiene, use of nose masks and most recently to get vaccinated. However, there are debates on the successes and failures of the interventions. While it is largely believed that these interventions all culminated in reducing the rate of infections, there are arguments of socioeconomic disruptions, loss of jobs, unemployment, other health challenges and human right abuses arising from them.
This systemic review research question therefore focuses on analyzing the impact of the various health promotion strategies on the COVID 19 pandemic in the UK. This review will make use of secondary data mined from peer-reviewed journals published in recognized indexing databases. Specifically, journals will be sources from the following indexing databases; PubMed, MEDLINE, EBSCOHost and Science Direct.
Quality Assessment
To assess the quality of the research resources, an inclusions criterion will be papers published from 2020 till date that have quantitatively and qualitatively assessed health promotion in UK. Exclusion criteria will include publications on the pandemic not carried out or not focusing on health promotion in the UK and publications with citations below 5 (this is because citations are generally and index of a publications wide readership and acceptability).
A systemic analysis of the sourced publications will be carried out. Publications will be sourced to cover major regions in the UK. Five categories of data will be mined for this review. These are (1) studies on health public policies, (2) studies on supportive environment, (3) studies on supportive community action, (4) studies on development of personal skills, and (5) studies on reorientation of health workers.
These study resources will thereafter be categorized into two groups. The first group are those that presents how the various health promotion interventions positively influenced the pandemics by bringing about reduced rate of infection, hospitalization and death. The second group are those that focused on the socioeconomic and other public health challenges that arose as a result of these interventions in combating the pandemic. Specifically, papers that focused on increased health burden related to other diseases and other public health challenges, unemployment, increased poverty, job losses and human right violations will be considered.
Search Strategy
A carefully designed search strategy will be used to mine for study resources. The search will make use of terms relevant to the research question including elements from the population, intervention, and the outcome of interest. Both keywords and controlled terms, wildcards (*) and Boolean operators OR and AND will be employed to integrate terms and keywords as shown in Table 1 below:
SEARCH TERM 1
COVID 19 pandemic*
Or
COVID 19 pandemic in UK
Or
Health Responses to COVID 19 in the UK
or
COVID 19 disruptions in the UK
In UK AND SEARCH TERM 2
Government policies*
Or
Government interventions*
Or
Reducing prevalence of COVID 19 in the UK
AND SEARCH TERM 3
outcomes of COVID 19 interventions
Or
outcomes*
positive*
negative*
impact*
Data Extraction and Synthesis
Data from both groups will be extracted and observed and compared. Available data will be outlined, organized, integrated and presented logically using descriptive tools such as tabular and graphical presentation tools like tables, bar chart, pie charts and histograms. Data will be presented to clearly shown comparisons among all the categories of data mined. Where necessary, statistical analysis will be carried out using appropriate analytical tools for analyzing significance of differences. Data analysis will be carried out with the aid of statistical packages such as Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS).
Interpretation
Interpretation of available data will involve crucial analysis of available evidences to predict their relations to health promotion response during the COVID-19 event in the UK. Available data will be interpreted in line with the hypothesis and summarized appropriately. Particularly conclusions will be made on (i) weather or not there is enough data to justify that the various health promotion interventions are directly responsible for reducing the prevalence of the disease in the UK (ii) whether or not the various health promotion interventions are lined to the negative public health and socio-economic consequences experienced during the pandemic, and (iii) if there is a significant comparison between the pros and the cons of these health promotion interventions. Thereafter, recommendations will be given in line with the available evidence.
Dissertation Outline
Research Work Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Identify and define the research question.
Plan research proposal. Identify literature sources.
Plan criteria for eligibility and research methods.
Submit research proposal. Conduct search using eligibility criteria.
Plot chapter structure. Data collection.
Assess study materials to identify possible bias. Analyze and report results.
Result interpretation
Discussion
Conclusion writing.
Abstract writing. Review updates and improve on areas of interest with supervisor. Submit final work to supervisor for final review. Final review and proof reading. Submission of Dissertation References
Aragona, M., Barbato, A., Cavani, A., Costanzo, G. and Mirisola, C., 2020. Negative impacts of COVID-19 lockdown on mental health service access and follow-up adherence for immigrants and individuals in socio-economic difficulties. Public Health, 186, pp.52-56.
Chia, P.Y., Coleman, K.K., Tan, Y.K., Ong, S.W.X., Gum, M., Lau, S.K., Sutjipto, S., Lee, P.H., Young, B.E., Milton, D.K. and Gray, G.C., 2020. Detection of air and surface contamination by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in hospital rooms of infected patients.MedRxiv.
Gov.uk. 2022. https://www.gov.uk/coronavirus. Accessed, March, 2022
Kang, Y. and Xu, S., 2020. Comprehensive overview of COVID19 based on current evidence.Dermatologic therapy,33(5), p.e13525.
Karia, R., Gupta, I., Khandait, H., Yadav, A. and Yadav, A., 2020. COVID-19 and its modes of transmission.SN comprehensive clinical medicine,2(10), pp.1798-1801.
Keyworth, C., Epton, T., Byrne-Davis, L., Leather, J.Z. and Armitage, C.J., 2021. What challenges do UK adults face when adhering to COVID-19-related instructions? Cross-sectional survey in a representative sample.Preventive Medicine,147, p.106458.
Khan, K.S., Kunz, R., Kleijnen, J. and Antes, G., 2003. Five steps to conducting a systematic review.Journal of the royal society of medicine,96(3), pp.118-121.
Kitchenham, B. (2004). Procedures for performing systematic reviews.Keele, UK, Keele University,33(2004), 1-26.
Maringe, C., Spicer, J., Morris, M., Purushotham, A., Nolte, E., Sullivan, R., Rachet, B. and Aggarwal, A., 2020. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cancer deaths due to delays in diagnosis in England, UK: a national, population-based, modelling study.The lancet oncology,21(8), pp.1023-1034.
Mattioli, A.V., Sciomer, S., Cocchi, C., Maffei, S. and Gallina, S., 2020. Quarantine during COVID-19 outbreak: Changes in diet and physical activity increase the risk of cardiovascular disease.Nutrition, Metabolism and Cardiovascular Diseases,30(9), pp.1409-1417.
Oboh, G., Ogunsuyi, O.B., Oyeleye, S.I. and Adefegha, S.A., 2021. Tropical fruits and vegetables as immune boosters against coronavirus disease (Covid-19): Call for cautious optimism.Tropical Journal of Natural Product Research, pp.1521-1527.
Plzkov, L. and Smeral, E., 2021. Impact of the COVID-19 crisis on European tourism. Tourism Economics, p.13548166211031113.
Rutter, M.D., Brookes, M., Lee, T.J., Rogers, P. and Sharp, L., 2021. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on UK endoscopic activity and cancer detection: a National Endoscopy Database Analysis.Gut,70(3), pp.537-543.
Spiro, N., Perkins, R., Kaye, S., Tymoszuk, U., Mason-Bertrand, A., Cossette, I., Glasser, S. and Williamon, A., 2021. The effects of COVID-19 lockdown 1.0 on working patterns, income, and wellbeing among performing arts professionals in the United Kingdom (AprilJune 2020). Frontiers in psychology, 11, p.4105.
WHO, 2022. https://www.who.int/teams/health-promotion/enhanced-wellbeing/first-global-conference/actions. Accessed March, 2022
World Health Organization, 1986. Ottawa charter for health promotion, 1986 (No. WHO/EURO: 1986-4044-43803-61677). World Health Organization. Regional Office for Europe.
