The timing of stay-at-home provisions can influence the effectiveness of the measure.

• Stay-at-home provisions that are implemented during specified intervals should only be considered during influenza epidemics and pandemics of high or extraordinary severity.
• Complete restriction of movement of populations can aid national or regional efforts to reduce community transmission of respiratory diseases, as well as contain the spread of the disease when implemented early in an outbreak (433).
• Movement restrictions of various levels of stringency were widely used during the global response to the COVID-19 pandemic (434).
• There may be a gradation of stay-at-home provisions as part of a combination of PHSM, and due to their very high adverse socioeconomic impacts such measures will need to be considered only in the most extreme contexts, and implemented for the shortest possible duration.
• The negative and inequitable impacts of stay-at-home provisions, which particularly affect vulnerable and marginalized groups, may be reduced through social policies.
• Stay-at-home provisions may be more effective earlier in an epidemic or pandemic, and consideration should be given to their duration and gradual relaxation to avoid sudden increases in infections.
• In some countries, stay-at-home provisions may not be legally permitted