Abstract
Objectives To explore parents’ perceptions of COVID-19-like symptoms in their child and attitudes towards isolating from others in the household when unwell.
Study Design Qualitative, semi-structured interviews.
Methods 30 semi-structured telephone interviews with parents of children between 4 and 18 years.
Results We found four themes relating to symptom attribution (‘normalising symptoms’, ‘err on the side of caution’, ‘experience of temperature’, ‘symptoms not normal for us’). In general, parents were more likely to attribute symptoms to COVID-19 if a temperature was present or the symptoms were perceived as ‘unusual’ for their family. Four themes relating to self-isolation (‘difficult to prevent contact with children’, ‘isolation would be no different to lockdown life’, ‘ability to get food and supplies’, ‘limited space’). Parents believed they would find isolation within the household difficult or impossible if they had dependent children, had limited space or could not shop for groceries.
Conclusions The findings highlight complexities in symptom perception, attribution, and household isolation. We suggest that they can be overcome by a) providing better guidance on what symptoms require action, b) providing guidance as to how to prevent infection within the household, and c) by supporting families with grocery shopping through a potential second or third wave.
Competing Interest Statement
GJR and LES are participant in meetings of UK Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies and its subgroups.
Funding Statement
The sponsor and funder of the study had no role in study design, analysis, interpretation, or writing of the report. The corresponding author had full access to all the data in the study and had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.
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:
All participants received information sheets. Informed consent was provided electronically, prior to the interviews. The research was approved by the Psychiatry, Nursing and Midwifery Research Ethics Subcommittee at Kings College London (ref MRSP-19/20-18349).
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.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
Addresses and positions Ava Hodson: King’s College London, Department of War Studies, Strand Campus, London, WC2R 2LS PhD Student
Lisa Woodland: King’s College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Department of Psychological Medicine, Weston Education Centre, Cutcombe Road, London, SE5 9RJ, UK PhD Student
Louise E Smith: King’s College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Department of Psychological Medicine, Weston Education Centre, Cutcombe Road, London, SE5 9RJ, UK Post-Doctoral Research Associate
G James Rubin: King’s College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, Department of Psychological Medicine, Weston Education Centre, Cutcombe Road, London, SE5 9RJ, UK Reader in the Psychology of Emerging Health Risks
Data Availability
All data referred to in the manuscript can be made available if necessary.
