Abstract
Aim To systematically review qualitative literature on social distancing in order to identify and describe factors that enable or prevent its implementation.
Methods A rapid systematic qualitative review was conducted for which a comprehensive systematic search was carried out across eleven databases. Included papers report on primary qualitative studies of the barriers and facilitators to the implementation of social distancing measures in potentially epidemic infectious diseases. An adapted meta-ethnographical approach was used for synthesis. Review findings were assessed for strength and reliability using GRADE-CERQual.
Results 29 papers were included from the systematic search that yielded 5620 results and supplementary methods. The review identifies two broad categories of barriers to social distancing measures: individual- or community-level psychological or sociological phenomena, and perceived shortcomings in governmental action. Based on this, 25 themes are identified that can be addressed to improve the implementation of social distancing.
Conclusion There are many barriers, on different levels, to the implementation of social distancing measures. Among other findings, the review identifies the need for good communication as well as the need for authorities to provide comprehensive support as two key opportunities to increase acceptability and adherence. High-quality research is needed during the COVID-19 pandemic to better describe mechanisms by which implementation of social distancing can be improved, and, more importantly, what is already known has to be put into practice.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
No external funding was received for this work.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethical approval was not needed for this systematic review of published literature.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest statement: The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.
Role of funding source: The authors did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work.
Ethical Approval: Formal ethical approval was not required for this review.
One, minor updates to the description of methods used, two, inclusion of participant quotes in the results section to improve transparency of the review process, and three, update of Table 2 to improve transparency of confidence ratings and legibility.
Data Availability
This is a systematic review. Included studies and data are in the public domain.
