Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Aug 5;15(8):e0236917.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0236917. eCollection 2020.

Public perspectives on protective measures during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Netherlands, Germany and Italy: A survey study

Karien Meier  1 , Toivo Glatz  2 , Mathijs C Guijt  1 , Marco Piccininni  2 , Merel van der Meulen  1 , Khaled Atmar  1 , Anne-Tess C Jolink  1 , Tobias Kurth  2 , Jessica L Rohmann  2 , Amir H Zamanipoor Najafabadi  1 ; COVID-19 Survey Study group
Affiliations

Public perspectives on protective measures during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Netherlands, Germany and Italy: A survey study

Karien Meier et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Background: The extent to which people implement government-issued protective measures is critical in preventing further spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. Our study aimed to describe the public belief in the effectiveness of protective measures, the reported implementation of these measures, and to identify communication channels used to acquire information on COVID-19 in European countries during the early stage of the pandemic.

Methods and findings: An online survey available in multiple languages was disseminated starting on March 19th, 2020. After five days, we computed descriptive statistics for countries with more than 500 respondents. Each day, we assessed enacted community containment measures by stage of stringency (I-IV). In total, 9,796 adults responded, of whom 8,611 resided in the Netherlands (stage III), 604 in Germany (stage III), and 581 in Italy (stage IV). To explore possible dynamics as containment strategies intensified, we also included 1,365 responses submitted during the following week. Participants indicated support for governmental measures related to avoiding social gatherings, selective closure of public places, and hand hygiene and respiratory measures (range for all measures: 95.0%-99.7%). Respondents from the Netherlands less frequently considered a complete social lockdown effective (59.2%), compared to respondents in Germany (76.6%) or Italy (87.2%). Italian residents applied enforced social distancing measures more frequently (range: 90.2%-99.3%, German and Dutch residents: 67.5%-97.0%) and self-initiated hygienic and social distancing behaviors (range: 36.3%-96.6%, German and Dutch residents: 28.3%-95.7%). Respondents reported being sufficiently informed about the outbreak and behaviors to avoid infection (range: 90.2%-91.1%). Information channels most commonly reported included television newspapers, official health websites, and social media. One week later, we observed no major differences in submitted responses.

Conclusions: During the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic, belief in the effectiveness of protective measures among survey respondents from three European countries was high and participants reported feeling sufficiently informed. In March 2020, implementation of measures differed between countries and were highest among respondents from Italy, who were subjected to the most stringent lockdown measures and greatest COVID-19 burden in Europe during this period.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Outside of the submitted work, TK reports to having contributed to an advisory board of CoLucid and a research project funded by Amgen, for which the Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin received an unrestricted compensation. He further reports having received honoraria from Lilly, Newsenselab, and Total for providing methodological advice, from Novartis and from Daiichi Sankyo for providing a lecture on neuroepidemiology and research methods. He is further a consulting clinical epidemiology editor at The BMJ and has received compensation for editorial services. This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials. All other authors have nothing to disclose.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Flow chart of respondents in survey, on March 23rd, 2020.
Fig 2
Fig 2. Being informed about and belief in the effectiveness of policy recommendations during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic on March 23rd, 2020, by country.
Response percentages are rounded and may not add up to 100%. Percentages below 5% were omitted in the visualization.
Fig 3
Fig 3. Individual implementation of protective measures in response to the COVID-19 pandemic (early phase) on March 23rd, 2020, by country.
Response percentages are rounded and may not add up to 100%. Percentages below 5% were omitted in the visualization.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Dong E, Du H, Gardner L. An interactive web-based dashboard to track COVID-19 in real time. Lancet Infect Dis. 2020;20: 533–534. 10.1016/S1473-3099(20)30120-1 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. COVID-19 pandemic. In: European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control [Internet]. [cited 24 Jun 2020]. Available: https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/covid-19-pandemic
    1. Heymann DL, Shindo N, WHO Scientific and Technical Advisory Group for Infectious Hazards. COVID-19: what is next for public health? Lancet. 2020;395: 542–545. 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30374-3 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ebrahim SH, Ahmed QA, Gozzer E, Schlagenhauf P, Memish ZA. Covid-19 and community mitigation strategies in a pandemic. BMJ. 2020;368: m1066 10.1136/bmj.m1066 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Anderson RM, Heesterbeek H, Klinkenberg D, Hollingsworth TD. How will country-based mitigation measures influence the course of the COVID-19 epidemic? Lancet. 2020;395: 931–934. 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30567-5 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms