Covid-19 Post-Shielding Research: October 2023
This report explores how people formerly on Scotland’s Highest Risk List experienced shielding, how they’ve adapted since its end, and their views on current guidance. It highlights ongoing behaviours, areas of concern, and what support or information may help this group in the future.
Conclusion
The research highlighted that the experience of shielding during the HRL period varied greatly among participants, influenced by factors like living arrangements, practical support, and the clarity of guidance. While being on the HRL brought reassurance to some, challenges related to support and isolation also emerged.
Reflecting on being on the HRL, many interview participants expressed comfort and reassurance at being placed on the list seeing it as a protective measure that acknowledged their vulnerability. The clear communication of their level of risk influenced cautious decision-making. However, the lack of sufficient support toward the end diminished the positive aspects, leaving some individuals feeling isolated. Stakeholders echoed this observing initial satisfaction among those on the list, recognising it as an acknowledgment of their health conditions. Yet, stakeholders noted that the support provided to those on the Highest Risk List did not always meet expectations. Over time, as people were removed from the list, those that remained on the Highest Risk List sometimes felt neglected and unsupported.
Post-HRL, it was evident that individuals exhibited varying levels of comfort in resuming activities, with factors like ventilation, group size, and familiarity influencing their decisions in addition to whether or not they had been asked to shield during the HRL list period. Common concerns among those who had been shielding included a worry that people would become complacent and have less consideration for those who were previously on the HRL. Encouragement for ongoing vaccination and improved ventilation were seen as crucial interventions. Participants who had been on the HRL or that represented those who had been called for clearer guidelines and information to make informed choices.
The study also indicated differing public perceptions of past and current Scottish Government guidance on Covid-19, emphasising the importance of clear, consistent, and accessible guidance and communication of that guidance, as well as regular, consistent communication generally. While some felt informed and reassured, others experienced confusion and uncertainty.
Looking to the future, respondents who had been asked to shield had varying outlooks, with some anticipating no longer considering themselves at higher risk, while others expected ongoing worries to affect their quality of life. Future measures in response to another variant or surge were met with varying levels of acceptability, with public health messaging and face coverings being more widely supported than physical restrictions and closures. These patterns were consistent across the general population and those who had been asked to shield while the HRL was in operation.
In terms of compliance with future measures, the majority of the general population and those who had been asked to shield believed the entire population of Scotland should conform, while a minority thought only vulnerable individuals or the unvaccinated should comply. Awareness of the Scottish Government's ability to recontact individuals on the HRL was split among those with shielding experience.
Overall, the study underlines the multifaceted nature of public perception, understanding, and experiences related to Covid-19 guidance and government initiatives in Scotland, emphasising the need for clear, consistent, and accessible communication to enhance public trust and understanding. It also highlights the complex considerations that individuals have regarding post-HRL behaviours and attitudes, suggesting the importance of tailored support and information provision.