Background During the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, social distancing and hand hygiene have been the primary means of reducing transmission in the absence of effective treatments or vaccines, but understanding of their determinants is limited. This study aimed to investigate knowledge and socio-cognitive perceptions, and their associations with such protective behaviours, in UK university students. Methods A cross-sectional online survey of 293 students was undertaken on 13 May 2020. Survey questions addressed demographics, knowledge of the disease and effectiveness of the protective measures, risk perception, socio-cognitive perceptions (e.g. attitude, social support, and self-efficacy), habit, time factors and trust, as well as the hand hygiene and social distancing behaviours. Multiple linear regression was used to identify the strongest associations of potential determinants with behaviour. Results Participants reported high levels of social distancing with 88.9% answering “Mostly” or “Always” for every activity, but only 42.0% reporting the same for all hand hygiene activities. Knowledge of the effectiveness of each activity in preventing transmission was high, with 90.7% and 93.5% respectively identifying at least 7 of 8 hand hygiene or 9 of 10 social distancing activities correctly. Habit (β = 0.39, p = 0.001) and time factors (β = 0.28, p = 0.001) were the greatest contributors to unique variance in hand hygiene behaviour, followed by ethnicity (β = − 0.13, p = 0.014) and risk perception (β = 0.13, p = 0.016). For social distancing behaviour, the determinants were self-efficacy (β = 0.25, p < 0.001), perceived advantages (β = 0.15, p = 0.022), trust in policy (β = 0.14, p = 0.026) and gender (β = − 0.14, p = 0.016). Regression models explained 40% hand hygiene and 25% social distancing variance. Conclusions This study indicated that communications about effectiveness of hand hygiene and social distancing behaviours had been effective in terms of knowledge acquisition. However, in the light of likely second waves of COVID-19, attention to maintaining social distancing behaviour and improving hand hygiene behaviour may need to address more difficult areas of changing habits, overcoming time factors and building trust, as well as interventions to increase self-efficacy and address risk perception concerns.

BackgroundDuring the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, social distancing and hand hygiene have been the primary means of reducing transmission in the absence of effective treatments or vaccines, but understanding of their determinants is limited. This study aimed to investigate knowledge and socio-cognitive perceptions, and their associations with such protective behaviours, in UK university students. MethodsA cross-sectional online survey of 293 students was undertaken on 13 May 2020. Survey questions addressed demographics, knowledge of the disease and effectiveness of the protective measures, risk perception, socio-cognitive perceptions (e.g. attitude, social support, and self-efficacy), habit, time factors and trust, as well as the hand hygiene and social distancing behaviours. Multiple linear regression was used to identify the strongest associations of potential determinants with behaviour.ResultsParticipants reported high levels of social distancing with 88.9 % answering “Mostly” or “Always” for every activity, but only 42.0% reporting the same for all hand hygiene activities. Knowledge of the effectiveness of each activity in preventing transmission was high, with 90.7% and 93.5% respectively identifying at least 7 of 8 hand hygiene or 9 of 10 social distancing activities correctly. Habit (β = 0.39, p <0.001) and time factors (β = 0.28, p <0.001) were the greatest contributors to unique variance in hand hygiene behaviour, followed by ethnicity (β = -0.13, p =0.014) and risk perception (β = 0.13, p = 0.016). For social distancing behaviour, the determinants were self-efficacy (β = 0.25, p <0.001), perceived advantages (β = 0.15, p = 0.022), trust in policy (β = 0.14, p = 0.026) and gender (β = -0.14, p = 0.016). Regression models explained 40% hand hygiene and 25% social distancing variance.ConclusionsThis study indicated that communications about effectiveness of hand hygiene and social distancing behaviours had been effective in terms of knowledge acquisition. However, in the light of likely second waves of COVID-19, attention to maintaining social distancing behaviour and improving hand hygiene behaviour may need to address more difficult areas of changing habits, overcoming time factors and building trust, as well as interventions to increase self-efficacy and address risk perception concerns.

Determining a measure of interpretive accuracy that can be used to assess ability to interpret radiographic trauma images is fraught with difficulties. Consequently, nurses may attempt to prove their skills by directly comparing their abilities to those of their medical colleagues. However, as a result of marked variation in the ability of senior house officers to interpret trauma radiographs, a similar ability does not automatically imply that a satisfactory level of ability has been achieved.

The purpose of this study was to identify the number of hospitals employing nurses and radiographers formally to undertake radiographic interpretation of trauma images and to compare the education undertaken by these professionals and any limitations imposed. A cross-sectional questionnaire survey of nurse and radiographer managers responsible for Accident and Emergency services within National Health Service hospitals in the UK was undertaken in January 2002. A total of 526 questionnaires were distributed. Response rates of 75.3% (n=198/263) and 69.2% (n=182/263) were received from radiographer and nurse managers, respectively. 96 nurse managers (52.7%, n=96/182) indicated that nurses within their departments were formally interpreting radiographs as part of their extended role whereas only 68 radiography managers (34.3%, n=68/198) indicated that radiographers were undertaking this role. Education to support radiographic interpretation varied markedly with 92.6% (n=63/68) of radiographers having undertaken a postgraduate qualification in image interpretation. In contrast, nurse education at all levels was more generic to the nursing role. The range of examinations which nurses and radiographers were permitted to interpret also varied markedly. Radiographic interpretation is undertaken by both nurses and radiographers. However, there is interprofessional and intraprofessional inconsistency in the range of examinations they are permitted to interpret and the level of education provided to support this role. Consequently, it can be surmised that national variation in service delivery and quality exists and a review of current service delivery strategies is recommended.

No abstract