Perceived Importance of Pandemic Interventions for Attending Cultural Events – Findings From Germany

Abstract

BackgroundDuring the COVID-19 pandemic, many cultural and sporting events were held without spectators or had to be cancelled. Therefore, several containment strategies to provide requirements for safe events were developed and tested. Nonetheless, every second (50.7%) is afraid of becoming infected on an event. We therefore investigated which hygiene and containment measures are seen to be important from the visitor’s point of view and thus might increase subjective sense of safety.Methods This online study was carried out in November 2020. A total of 1,004 persons, who regularly attended events before the pandemic, took part in the study. The importance of different hygiene and containment measures was evaluated using 5-point Likert-scale (1 “unimportant” to 5 “extremely important”). Potential statistical differences in socio-demographical aspects (age, gender, net disposable income for leisure activities) and attendance on events were tested with analyses of variance. ResultsParticipants reported the use of disinfectant (M = 4.10) as the most important element of containment strategies, followed by transparent information on the hygiene strategy (M = 4.00), reduced occupancy (M = 3.98), and optimized ventilation (M = 3.97). Body temperature measurement at the entrance (M = 3.27), a negative COVID-19 test (M = 3.11), completion of a health questionnaire (M = 3.05), and abandoning breaks and catering (M = 2.98) were considered as less important.Analyses of group differences in socio-demographical aspects found abandoning breaks and catering to be more important to men than to women. This strategy is also more important to people aged 66 and above than to younger age groups. For women, the use of disinfectant is considerably more important. No other significant differences exist.ConclusionCombining relevant measures appears to be important to provide a safe containment strategy. Measures aimed at positively influencing people’s sense of safety do not fully correspond to medical knowledge of effectiveness. There are also target group-specific differences in the rating of measures, which should be considered while preparing containment strategies. To describe the dynamic development of changes in subjective rating of containment strategies, continuing research is needed.

The Agile Co-production and Evaluation (ACE) framework for developing public health interventions, messaging and guidance

“…[19] Online studies evaluating perceived importance of mitigation measures among individuals attending cultural events informed implementation of infection control polices at mass events. [22] Online message testing has significant limitations -it can only tap into self-reported hypothetical intentions among people able and willing to take part in online studies, which will exclude important sectors of the population even when representative sampling is employed. However, as part of an evaluation package this method can provide useful evidence concerning the relative effects of different messages on attitudes and intentions (usually a necessary albeit not sufficient precursor of behaviour) in a large population sample.…”

Requirements to minimize airborne infections related to virus aerosol contamination at indoor cultural events

“…Another important point concerns the question of how visitors prepare for participation in an event, what preventive measures they take and what expectations they have of the organizer. This aspect was examined by Weber et al [66] as part of an online study. The use of disinfectants was mentioned as the most important element of containment, followed by transparent information on the hygiene strategy, reduced crowds, optimized ventilation, body temperature measurement at the entrance, negative SARS-CoV-2 test, filling out a health questionnaire.…”

“…Choir and other scenarios Modeling study [47] Socio-cultural events non-randomized controlled study [61] Chorus rehearsal Estimation of infectious quanta [50] Wind instruments Risk of spreading infectious particles [51] Concert hall Evaluation of the infection risk using mannequins [52,53] Indoor sports and cultural events simulation study to estimate the burden of disease under conditions of controlled epidemics [54] Mass gatherings Effectiveness of public health measures [62] Mass sporting and cultural events Use of interviews and questionnaires, to describe the potential public health impact [63] Singing event Evaluation of safer singing practices [56] Live concert Randomized controlled trial of attendees [57] Indoor live concert Screening of attendees for SARS-CoV-2 antigen before the event [59,60] Concert events Assessment of SARS-CoV-2 transmission using contract-tracing data [55] Carnival Seroepidemiological observational study [65] Visitor's point of view Online study with persons, who regularly attended events before the pandemic [66] Sport events Assessment of the suitability and feasibility of a hygiene concept [64] Vernez et al [67] analyzed the situation in a poorly ventilated courtroom. There are certainly parallels to a cultural event here.…”