Public preferences for interventions to prevent emerging infectious disease threats: a discrete choice experiment

Navigating Public Policy Responses to a Pandemic: The Balancing Act Between Physical Health, Mental Health, and Household Income

OBJECTIVE

During COVID-19, governments imposed restrictions that reduced pandemic-related health risks but likely increased personal and societal mental health risk, partly through reductions in household income. This study aimed to quantify the public's willingness to accept trade-offs between pandemic health risks, household income reduction, and increased risk of mental illness that may result from future pandemic-related policies.

METHODS

A total of 547 adults from an online panel participated in a discrete choice experiment where they were asked to choose between hypothetical future pandemic scenarios. Each scenario was characterized by personal and societal risks of dying from the pandemic, experiencing long-term complications, developing anxiety/depression, and reductions in household income. A latent class regression was used to estimate trade-offs.

RESULTS

Respondents state a willingness to make trade-offs across these attributes if the benefits are large enough. They are willing to accept 0.8% lower household income (0.7-1.0), 2.7% higher personal risk of anxiety/depression (1.8-3.6), or 3.2% higher societal rate of anxiety/depression (1.7-4.7) in exchange for 300 fewer deaths from the pandemic.

CONCLUSION

Results reveal that individuals are willing to accept lower household income and higher rates of mental illness, both personal and societal, if the physical health benefits are large enough. Respondents placed greater emphasis on maintaining personal, as opposed to societal, mental health risk and were most interested in preventing pandemic-related deaths. Governments should consider less restrictive policies when pandemics have high morbidity but low mortality to avoid the prospect of improving physical health while simultaneously reducing net social welfare.

Treatment preferences among people at risk of developing tuberculosis: A discrete choice experiment

Diagnosing and treating people with bacteriologically-negative but radiologically-apparent tuberculosis (TB) may contribute to more effective TB care and reduce transmission. However, optimal treatment approaches for this group are unknown. It is important to understand peoples' preferences of treatment options for effective programmatic implementation of people-centred treatment approaches. We designed and implemented a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to solicit treatment preferences among adults (≥18 years) with TB symptoms attending a primary health clinic in Blantyre, Malawi. Treatment attributes included in the DCE were as follows: duration of treatment; number of tablets per dose; reduction in the risk of being unwell with TB disease; likelihood of infecting others; adverse effects from the treatment; frequency of follow up; and the annual travel cost to access care. Quantitative choice modelling with multinomial logit models estimated through frequentist and Bayesian approaches investigated preferences for the management of bacteriologically-negative, but radiographically-apparent TB. 128 participants were recruited (57% male, 43.8% HIV-positive, 8.6% previously treated for TB). Participants preferred to take any treatment compared to not taking treatment (odds ratio [OR] 5.78; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.40, 13.90). Treatments that reduced the relative risk of developing TB disease by 80% were preferred (OR: 2.97; 95% CI: 2.09, 4.21) compared to treatments that lead to a lower reduction in risk of 50%. However, there was no evidence for treatments that are 95% effective being preferred over those that are 80% effective. Participants strongly favoured the treatments that could completely stop transmission (OR: 7.87, 95% CI: 5.71, 10.84), and prioritised avoiding side effects (OR: 0.19, 95% CI: 0.12, 0.29). There was no evidence of an interaction between perceived TB disease risk and treatment preferences. In summary, participants were primarily concerned with the effectiveness of TB treatments and strongly preferred treatments that removed the risk of onward transmission. Person-centred approaches of preferences for treatment should be considered when designing new treatment strategies. Understanding treatment preferences will ensure that any recommended treatment for probable early TB disease is well accepted and utilized by the public.

Population preferences for non-pharmaceutical interventions to control the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: trade-offs among public health, individual rights, and economics

PROBLEM

Policymakers must decide on interventions to control the pandemic. These decisions are driven by weighing the risks and benefits of various non-pharmaceutical intervention alternatives. Due to the nature of the pandemic, these decisions are not based on sufficient evidence regarding the effects, nor are decision-makers informed about the willingness of populations to accept the economic and health risks associated with different policy options. This empirical study seeks to reduce uncertainty by measuring population preferences for non-pharmaceutical interventions.

METHODS

An online-based discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted to elicit population preferences. Respondents were asked to choose between three pandemic scenarios with different interventions and impacts of the Corona pandemic. In addition, Best-worst scaling (BWS) was used to analyze the impact of the duration of individual interventions on people's acceptance. The marginal rate of substitution was applied to estimate willingness-to-accept (WTA) for each intervention and effect by risk of infection.

RESULTS

Data from 3006 respondents were included in the analysis. The DCE showed, economic effect of non-pharmaceutical measures had a large impact on choice decisions for or against specific lockdown scenarios. Individual income decreases had the most impact. Excess mortality and individual risk of infection were also important factors influencing choice decisions. Curfews, contact restrictions, facility closures, personal data transmissions, and mandatory masking in public had a lesser impact. However, significant standard deviations in the random parameter logit model (RPL) indicated heterogeneities in the study population. The BWS results showed that short-term restrictions were more likely to be accepted than long-term restrictions. According to WTA estimates, people would be willing to accept a greater risk of infection to avoid loss of income.

DISCUSSION

The results can be used to determine which consequences of pandemic measures would be more severe for the population. For example, the results show that citizens want to limit the decline in individual income during pandemic measures. Participation in preference studies can also inform citizens about potential tradeoffs that decision-makers face in current and future decisions during a pandemic. Knowledge of the population's preferences will help inform decisions that consider people's perspectives and expectations for the future. Survey results can inform decision-makers about the extent to which the population is willing to accept certain lockdown measures, such as curfews, contact restrictions, lockdowns, or mandatory masks.

Public acceptability of non-pharmaceutical interventions to control a pandemic in the UK: a discrete choice experiment

OBJECTIVE

To understand how individuals trade off between features of non-pharmaceutical interventions (eg, lockdowns) to control a pandemic across the four nations of the UK.

DESIGN

A survey that included a discrete choice experiment. The survey design was informed using policy documents, social media analysis and input from remote think-aloud interviews with members of the public (n=23).

SETTING

A nationwide survey across the four nations of the UK using an online panel between 29 October and 12 December 2020.

PARTICIPANTS

Individuals who are over 18 years old. A total of 4120 adults completed the survey (1112 in England, 848 in Northern Ireland, 1143 in Scotland and 1098 in Wales).

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

Adult's preferences for, and trade-offs between, type of lockdown restrictions, length of lockdown, postponement of routine healthcare, excess deaths, impact on the ability to buy things and unemployment.

RESULTS

The majority of adults are willing to accept higher excess deaths if this means lockdowns that are less strict, shorter and do not postpone routine healthcare. On average, respondents in England were willing to accept a higher increase in excess deaths to have less strict lockdown restrictions introduced compared with Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales, respectively. In all four countries, one out of five respondents were willing to reduce excess deaths at all costs.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of the UK population is willing to accept the increase in excess deaths associated with introducing less strict lockdown restrictions. The acceptability of different restriction scenarios varies according to the features of the lockdown and across countries. Governments can use information about trade-off preferences to inform the introduction of different lockdown restriction levels and design compensation policies that maximise societal welfare.

How Much Money Should be Paid for a Patient to Isolate During the COVID-19 Outbreak? A Discrete Choice Experiment in Iran

INTRODUCTION

Isolation of COVID-19 patients is a vital strategy for preventing the spread of the virus. Isolation without any incentive or compensation for the patients cannot be effective. We sought to find the monetary value of the willingness to accept (WTA) being isolated for COVID-19 in Iran.

METHODS

In this discrete choice experiment, scenarios were designed by reviewing the literature and semi-structural interviews. Fourteen choice sets with two scenarios were included in an internet-based questionnaire that was sent to the Telegram Social Network. A total of 617 individuals completed the questionnaire. A random-effects logistic regression model was used for the main analysis.

RESULTS

The average monetary value of a WTA 7 days of isolation was US$51.71 (95% confidence interval [CI] 43.09-60.33). The WTA for one day of isolation was US$1.48 (95% CI 1.11-1.85) for unemployed groups, US$1.49 (95% CI 1.18-1.79) for office employees and US$1.36 (95% CI 0.73-2.01) for manual workers. The WTA was 0.44 (95% CI 0.35-0.53) US$ for low-income groups, US$0.68 (95% CI 0.52-0.84) for middle-income groups and US$0.77 (95% CI 0.35-1.18) for high-income groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggested that financial preferences for being isolated vary widely across individuals within different socioeconomic groups. Policymakers should consider these differences when designing effective intervention to increase compliance with the isolation protocols during infectious disease outbreaks.

Public opinion on health care and public health

In the health policy literature, scholars and practitioners distinguish broadly between health care and public health interventions. Both types of policies are indispensable to deal with pressing health problems. Nevertheless, we know very little about how individuals support the principle logic behind these two approaches to health policy. In this paper, we analyze empirically whether individuals prefer either a health care-oriented or a public health-oriented approach to health policy. In addition, we explore political and socio-demographic factors explaining individuals' choices. To conduct this analysis, we use multivariate regression analysis based on data ( N = 5 442 ) from the 2018 wave of the Swiss Household Panel Survey. The survey contains high-quality data from a representative sample of the population living in Switzerland. Our results demonstrate that a majority of citizens prefers public health policies rather than policies ensuring access to health care. Especially, individuals with higher out-of-pocket payments in their health insurance plan support a public health over health care policy approach. Furthermore, those who prefer environmental protection over economic growth support public health over health care policy.

Feasibility of large-scale population testing for SARS-CoV-2 detection by self-testing at home

The simplicity and low cost of rapid point-of-care tests greatly facilitate large-scale population testing, which can contribute to controlling the spread of the COVID-19 virus. We evaluated the applicability of a self-testing strategy for SARS-CoV2 in a population-based, cross-sectional study in Cantabria, Spain, between April and May 2020. For the self-testing strategy, participants received the necessary material for the self-collection of blood and performance of a rapid antibody test using lateral flow immunoassay at home without the supervision of healthcare personnel. A total of 1,022 participants were enrolled. Most participants correctly performed the COVID-19 self-test the first time (91.3% [95% CI 89.4–92.9]). Only a minority of the participants (0.7%) needed the help of healthcare personnel, while 6.9% required a second kit delivery, for a total valid test result in 96.9% of the participants. Incorrect use of the self-test was not associated with the educational level, age over 65, or housing area. Prevalence of IgG antibodies against SARS-CoV2 for subjects with a valid rapid test result was 3.1% (95% CI 2.2–4.4), similar to the seroprevalence result obtained using a conventional approach carried out by healthcare professionals. In conclusion, COVID-19 self-testing should be considered as a screening tool.

Public Preferences for Government Response Policies on Outbreak Control

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to assess the extent to which public support for outbreak containment policies varies with respect to the severity of an infectious disease outbreak.

METHODS

A web-enabled survey was administered to 1017 residents of Singapore during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, and was quota-sampled based on age, sex, and ethnicity. A fractional-factorial design was used to create hypothetical outbreak vignettes characterised by morbidity and fatality rates, and local and global spread of an infectious disease. Each respondent was asked to indicate which response policies (among five policies restricting local movement and four border control policies) they would support in five randomly assigned vignettes. Binomial logistic regressions were used to predict the probabilities of support as a function of outbreak attributes, personal characteristics, and perceived policy effectiveness.

RESULTS

Likelihood of support varied across government response policies but was generally higher for border control policies compared with internal policies. The fatality rate was the most important factor for internal policies, while the degree of global spread was the most important for border control policies. In general, individuals who were less healthy, had higher-income, and were older were more likely to support these policies. Perceived effectiveness of a policy was a consistent and positive predictor of public support.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that campaigns to promote public support should be designed specifically to each policy and tailored to different segments of the population. They should also be adapted based on the evolving conditions of the outbreak in order to receive continued public support.

Factors Affecting Voluntary Self-Isolation Behavior to Cope with a Pandemic: Empirical Evidence from Colombia vs. Spain in Times of COVID-19

Global pandemics are not a new phenomenon. They have occurred at different points in time and can be of different scales. COVID-19 appeared in 2020 and its spread has reached more than 60 countries worldwide. This research aims to analyze voluntary self-isolation behavior used to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic. As part of this study, we carried out sampling in Colombia and Spain, which share similar cultural characteristics but which have substantial social and economic differences. A multi-group model was used to test the application of the theory of planned behavior and the theory of reasoned action in order to analyze self-isolation behavior. The results show that there are differences in self-isolation behavior between both countries, especially with regard to attitudes towards self-isolation and volitional behavior.

Understanding public preferences and trade-offs for government responses during a pandemic: a protocol for a discrete choice experiment in the UK

INTRODUCTION

Social distancing and lockdown measures are among the main government responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. These measures aim to limit the COVID-19 infection rate and reduce the mortality rate of COVID-19. Given we are likely to see local lockdowns until a treatment or vaccine for COVID-19 is available, and their effectiveness depends on public acceptability, it is important to understand public preference for government responses.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Using a discrete choice experiment (DCE), this study will investigate the public's preferences for pandemic responses in the UK. Attributes (and levels) are based on: (1) lockdown measures described in policy documents; (2) literature on preferences for lockdown measures and (3) a social media analysis. Attributes include: lockdown type; lockdown length; postponement of usual non-urgent medical care; number of excess deaths; number of infections; impact on household spending and job losses. We will prepilot the DCE using virtual think aloud interviews with respondents recruited via Facebook. We will collect preference data using an online survey of 4000 individuals from across the four UK countries (1000 per country). We will estimate the relative importance of the attributes, and the trade-offs individuals are willing to make between attributes. We will test if respondents' preferences differ based on moral attitudes (using the Moral Foundation Questionnaire), socioeconomic circumstances (age, education, economic insecurity, health status), country of residence and experience of COVID-19.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The University of Aberdeen's College Ethics Research Board (CERB) has approved the study (reference: CERB/2020/6/1974). We will seek CERB approval for major changes from the developmental and pilot work. Peer-reviewed papers will be submitted, and results will be presented at public health and health economic conferences nationally and internationally. A lay summary will be published on the Health Economics Research Unit blog.

Lessons learnt from easing COVID-19 restrictions: an analysis of countries and regions in Asia Pacific and Europe

The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented global crisis. Many countries have implemented restrictions on population movement to slow the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and prevent health systems from becoming overwhelmed; some have instituted full or partial lockdowns. However, lockdowns and other extreme restrictions cannot be sustained for the long term in the hope that there will be an effective vaccine or treatment for COVID-19. Governments worldwide now face the common challenge of easing lockdowns and restrictions while balancing various health, social, and economic concerns. To facilitate cross-country learning, this Health Policy paper uses an adapted framework to examine the approaches taken by nine high-income countries and regions that have started to ease COVID-19 restrictions: five in the Asia Pacific region (ie, Hong Kong [Special Administrative Region], Japan, New Zealand, Singapore, and South Korea) and four in Europe (ie, Germany, Norway, Spain, and the UK). This comparative analysis presents important lessons to be learnt from the experiences of these countries and regions. Although the future of the virus is unknown at present, countries should continue to share their experiences, shield populations who are at risk, and suppress transmission to save lives.

Lessons learnt from easing COVID-19 restrictions: an analysis of countries and regions in Asia Pacific and Europe

The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented global crisis. Many countries have implemented restrictions on population movement to slow the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 and prevent health systems from becoming overwhelmed; some have instituted full or partial lockdowns. However, lockdowns and other extreme restrictions cannot be sustained for the long term in the hope that there will be an effective vaccine or treatment for COVID-19. Governments worldwide now face the common challenge of easing lockdowns and restrictions while balancing various health, social, and economic concerns. To facilitate cross-country learning, this Health Policy paper uses an adapted framework to examine the approaches taken by nine high-income countries and regions that have started to ease COVID-19 restrictions: five in the Asia Pacific region (ie, Hong Kong [Special Administrative Region], Japan, New Zealand, Singapore, and South Korea) and four in Europe (ie, Germany, Norway, Spain, and the UK). This comparative analysis presents important lessons to be learnt from the experiences of these countries and regions. Although the future of the virus is unknown at present, countries should continue to share their experiences, shield populations who are at risk, and suppress transmission to save lives.

Willingness to Self-Isolate When Facing a Pandemic Risk: Model, Empirical Test, and Policy Recommendations

Infected people are isolated to minimize the spread of pandemic diseases. Therefore, the factors related to self-isolation (SI) should not be neglected, and it is important to investigate the factors leading the infected (or possibly infected) people to choose to self-isolate. In this paper, we tried to show that the theory of planned behavior provides a useful conceptual framework for SI when facing a pandemic risk, and a regression method with Chinese provincial (Guangdong Province) data was applied to investigate how attitude (ATT), subjective norms (SN), and perceived behavioral control (PBC) influence SI when facing a pandemic emergency. The results and the robustness tests confirm that ATT, SN, and PBC have a significant positive influence on SI when facing a pandemic emergency. ATT plays the most important role, followed by SN and then PBC. Based on the factors of SI, we found, through theoretical and empirical analyses, at least three important aspects that local governments need to consider to encourage citizens to self-isolate when facing a pandemic.

Inferring who-infected-whom-where in the 2016 Zika outbreak in Singapore-a spatio-temporal model

Singapore experienced its first known Zika outbreak in 2016. Given the lack of herd immunity, the suitability of the climate for pathogen transmission, and the year-round presence of the vector—Aedes aegypti—Zika had the potential to become endemic, like dengue. Guillain–Barré syndrome and microcephaly are severe complications associated elsewhere with Zika and the risk of these complications makes understanding its spread imperative. We investigated the spatio-temporal spread of locally transmitted Zika in Singapore and assessed the relevance of non-residential transmission of Zika virus infections, by inferring the possible infection tree (i.e. who-infected-whom-where) and comparing inferences using geographically resolved data on cases' home, their work, or their home and work. We developed a spatio-temporal model using time of onset and both addresses of the Zika-confirmed cases between July and September 2016 to estimate the infection tree using Bayesian data augmentation. Workplaces were involved in a considerable fraction (64.2%) of infections, and homes and workplaces may be distant relative to the scale of transmission, allowing ambulant infected persons may act as the ‘vector’ infecting distant parts of the country. Contact tracing is a challenge for mosquito-borne diseases, but inferring the geographically structured transmission tree sheds light on the spatial transmission of Zika to immunologically naive regions of the country.