» Articles » PMID: 36691218

Evaluation of the Shielding Initiative in Wales (EVITE Immunity): Protocol for a Quasiexperimental Study

Abstract

Introduction: Shielding aimed to protect those predicted to be at highest risk from COVID-19 and was uniquely implemented in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinically extremely vulnerable people identified through algorithms and screening of routine National Health Service (NHS) data were individually and strongly advised to stay at home and strictly self-isolate even from others in their household. This study will generate a logic model of the intervention and evaluate the effects and costs of shielding to inform policy development and delivery during future pandemics.

Methods And Analysis: This is a quasiexperimental study undertaken in Wales where records for people who were identified for shielding were already anonymously linked into integrated data systems for public health decision-making. We will: interview policy-makers to understand rationale for shielding advice to inform analysis and interpretation of results; use anonymised individual-level data to select people identified for shielding advice in March 2020 and a matched cohort, from routine electronic health data sources, to compare outcomes; survey a stratified random sample of each group about activities and quality of life at 12 months; use routine and newly collected blood data to assess immunity; interview people who were identified for shielding and their carers and NHS staff who delivered healthcare during shielding, to explore compliance and experiences; collect healthcare resource use data to calculate implementation costs and cost-consequences. Our team includes people who were shielding, who used their experience to help design and deliver this study.

Ethics And Dissemination: The study has received approval from the Newcastle North Tyneside 2 Research Ethics Committee (IRAS 295050). We will disseminate results directly to UK government policy-makers, publish in peer-reviewed journals, present at scientific and policy conferences and share accessible summaries of results online and through public and patient networks.

Citing Articles

The cost of implementing the COVID-19 shielding policy in Wales.

Sewell B, Farr A, Akbari A, Carson-Stevens A, Dale J, Edwards A BMC Public Health. 2023; 23(1):2342.

PMID: 38008730 PMC: 10680245. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-023-17169-3.


Rationale for the shielding policy for clinically vulnerable people in the UK during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study.

Porter A, Akbari A, Carson-Stevens A, Dale J, Dixon L, Edwards A BMJ Open. 2023; 13(8):e073464.

PMID: 37541747 PMC: 10407356. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-073464.

References
1.
Spitzer R, Kroenke K, Williams J, Lowe B . A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7. Arch Intern Med. 2006; 166(10):1092-7. DOI: 10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092. View

2.
Ware Jr J, Kosinski M, Keller S . A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care. 1996; 34(3):220-33. DOI: 10.1097/00005650-199603000-00003. View

3.
Gupta S . Intention-to-treat concept: A review. Perspect Clin Res. 2011; 2(3):109-12. PMC: 3159210. DOI: 10.4103/2229-3485.83221. View

4.
Mahase E . Covid-19: Government's shielding scheme failed thousands of clinically extremely vulnerable people, say MPs. BMJ. 2021; 373:n1033. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.n1033. View

5.
Oliver K, Lorenc T, Tinkler J, Bonell C . Understanding the unintended consequences of public health policies: the views of policymakers and evaluators. BMC Public Health. 2019; 19(1):1057. PMC: 6685223. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-019-7389-6. View