Influences of reopening businesses and social venues: COVID-19 incidence rate in East Texas county

Abstract

As the on-going severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic, we aimed to understand whether economic reopening (EROP) significantly influenced coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) incidence. COVID-19 data from Texas Health and Human Services between March and August 2020 were analysed. COVID-19 incidence rate (cases per 100 000 population) was compared to statewide for selected urban and rural counties. We used joinpoint regression analysis to identify changes in trends of COVID-19 incidence and interrupted time-series analyses for potential impact of state EROP orders on COVID-19 incidence. We found that the incidence rate increased to 145.1% (95% CI 8.4–454.5%) through 4th April, decreased by 15.5% (95% CI −24.4 −5.9%) between 5th April and 30th May, increased by 93.1% (95% CI 60.9–131.8%) between 31st May and 11th July and decreased by 13.2% (95% CI −22.2 −3.2%) after 12 July 2020. The study demonstrates the EROP policies significantly impacted trends in COVID-19 incidence rates and accounted for increases of 129.9 and 164.6 cases per 100 000 populations for the 24- or 17-week model, respectively, along with other county and state reopening ordinances. The incidence rate decreased sharply after 12th July considering the emphasis on a facemask or covering requirement in business and social settings.

A population-based spatio-temporal analysis of the early COVID-19 dynamic in Serbia

“…All these weakened measures have led to an increase in social interaction between people and their close contacts. Studies conducted by Siqueira et al (2020) and Le et al (2021) have also confirmed the impact of easing measures on increasing the number of infected people, while Chaurasia and Singh (2020), Ajbar et al (2021), andSimetin et al (2021) found the opposite; the easing of measures did not significantly affect the change in the number of infected people. Previous research has shown that interpersonal distance, which is violated in this case, was very important for reducing the number of infected in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic (Andersen 2020).…”

“…Authors further claim that there is no empirical evidence that loosening measures (economic reopening) caused an increase in confirmed cases. Another study conducted in East Texas county showed that after loosening measures and reopening, followed by another reopening, the number of infected increased (Le et al 2021). However, after that, the number of infected trended downwards, which the authors attribute to people wearing facemasks in business and social settings.…”

A SARS-CoV-2 outbreak associated with five air force bases and a nightclub following the lifting of COVID-19-related social restrictions, United Kingdom, July-to-September 2021

“…We believe our report is also novel in illustrating an example of how large outbreaks in the context of the easing of social restrictions may be addressed. The outbreaks described here primarily affected those likely to initially return to social venues following their reopening: young adults [ 27 ], who were likely at low personal risk from severe infection [ 21 , 22 ]. This population may have been less motivated, compared to a more vulnerable population, to change their behaviours to reduce transmission or infection risk.…”

“…Infection rates in the UK county where the outbreaks described, however, increased in late July 2021, particularly amongst adults aged under 30 years [ 25 ]. Although there are reports of COVID-19 outbreaks following the reopening of schools [ 26 ], and studies of area-level incidence during the reopening of businesses and social venues [ 27 ], we are not aware of any published reports of outbreaks occurring directly after widespread reopening of businesses or social venues.…”