Valid infection control protocols
Events are part of social life and, as such, have a direct or indirect impact on the bio-psychosocial health of all involved persons (employees, participants, visitors, etc.). In a pandemic, events must take into account and scale down the risk of infection by a suitable infection control protocol (ICP). Until now, there have been no standardized guidelines for the content of the ICP for events established by the Infection Protection Act (IPA); however, a range of handouts and recommendations have been issued by occupational insurance associations for employees and participants as well as for event organizers focusing on visitor safety. A standardized model for the evaluation and analysis of the dimensions precautions, protection targets of the involved groups, and setting is required. The consideration of all three dimensions allows for both the evaluation of existing ICPs and the development of valid ICPs under the aspects of effectiveness and efficiency.
Typologization of events: the setting
For a hazard-oriented typologization of events, a range of influential factors must be studied. Some of these factors are a direct result of event planning and realization, and others can be deduced from the definition and prioritization of protection targets. Sakschewski and Paul (
2017) cite the event organizer’s work experience and competence and the venue operator’s function, visitors in attendance, sociodemographic factors, and situational aspects attributed to the event experience, the type of event, the format of the venue, and the
Gestalt (shape) of the venue site, meaning the spatial relationship between the scenery and the audience. Gestalt (shape) is a term borrowed from psychology. According to Gestalt psychology, human perception can be described as the ability to discern structures and principles of order in sensory impressions. In this context, the shape of an event means the spatial arrangement of scene and audience area as well as the movement of visitors in the event area and in relation to the surroundings. From the perspective of the authorities issuing the license, specifically factors such as venue site and attendance or the event organizer competence and work experience are studied (State Capital Munich
2015). For an evaluation of the infection risk for employees and participants, recommendations cited in the employer’s liability insurance association policies are crucial, which, if in doubt, result in a special risk assessment of the activities being planned.
The IPAs do not necessarily distinguish between types of events. This is evident, for example, in Article 20 of the State of Brandenburg’s Second Infection Protection Act for SARS-CoV-2 Control, bundling memorials, museums, exhibition halls, galleries, planetariums, archives, amusement parks, zoos, game halls, zoological and botanical gardens; theaters, concert and opera houses, cinemas, trade fairs, exhibitions, amusement arcades, casinos and betting offices; and fun and leisure pools, outdoor pools, saunas, thermal baths, and wellness centers (BRAVORS
2022).
Sources of risk for COVID-19 disease include infection by aerosol transmission, droplet infection, or smear infection (RKI
2021). The precautions laid down in the IPAs aiming to minimize the risk of infection are based on these sources of risk. Additionally, the Robert Koch-Institut (RKI) recommends that these precautions be consistently complied with, even post-vaccination (RKI
2022). The risk of aerosol transmission is higher at indoor events than at outdoor events. Here, there is a compelling distinction due to the event location, as is also evident in the infection control regulations. At standing-room-only outdoor or indoor events, there is an increased risk of droplet infection due to potential situations in which a physical distance in public cannot be maintained. In this case, it is much more problematic to communicate and monitor that visitors maintain a physical distance as required by technical and organizational precautions throughout the entire event (including entry and exit) with employees monitoring compliance.
The concept of
setting is terminologically appropriate for the influential factors of space and visitors of the event.
Setting includes both spatial and behavioral characteristics. Spatially speaking, a distinction is made between
outdoor and indoor events. Behaviorally, the visitor
movement is taken into account (Chittaro and Ieronutti
2004). It is easier to control the physical distance in events with assigned
seats than in standing events. Taking into account the three statuses of visitor behavior to be expected and the two spatial principles of indoor and outdoor, what results for the influential factor of setting is a 2:3 matrix (Table
1).
Table 1
Characteristics of the influential factor setting
Room (R) | Indoor | RISI | RIM | RIST |
Outdoor | ROSI | ROM | ROST |
Different protection targets
Safety planning for an event includes planning and controlling the safety of the event technology used, assessing and evaluating potential hazards to visitors, and planning and implementing safety precautions for employees and participants throughout set-up, rehearsals, the event, and disassembly (Sakschewski and Paul
2017). Employees fall directly within the scope of protection of labor law and, together with the participants, within the scope of protection of workplace safety (Winkelmann and Sakschewski
2021). Participants are indirect addressees of occupational health and safety. Participants are artists or employees of a hired subcontractor whose employers are obliged to cooperate in implementing workplace safety and health protection provisions and, going by the nature of the activities, to instruct each other and their employees about the risks to the safety and health of the employees associated with the work. However, freelancers such as performers or other freelance participants at an event are not employees within the meaning of the Occupational Health and Safety Act (ArbSchG
2020). The scope of protection of status of employees and participants—which is based on the activity and not on the status of employment—can also be deduced from the scope of application of the precautionary regulations laid down by the employers' liability insurance association. They apply to the stage and performance area of event venues and the production and performance area of production facilities without making additional distinctions between the groups of people working here (DGUV
2013).
On the one hand, visitors have a right to physical integrity and, on the other hand, a right to the free development of their personality in Germany (Basic Law
2020). The organizer, that is to say, the legal or natural person authorized and competent to host and manage the event, is responsible for safety at the event, including visitor safety throughout the event, and for compliance with the regulations, including compliance with the latest applicable IPA, consistent with German venues and events regulations (Klode
2020). Accordingly, organizers are obliged to ensure that the visitor health and life are protected and not put at risk by the type, duration, or location of the event. At the same time, it must be planned and considered that individuals can and may, of their own free will, expose themselves to a situation with a higher risk potential and as an expression of the free development of their personality. The house rules for event venues and temporarily booked event locations provide the applicable legal framework. Such being the case, in comparison to employees, there is no direct authority to issue instructions, and in comparison to participants, there is no indirect supervisory power and information obligation. Safety protocols are planned and implemented in order to keep risks for visitors at bay.
Recommendations and guides on the planning and realization of events are available from authorities, organizations, and initiatives, which refer to infection prevention of employees and, in some cases, of participants as well (AGVSa
2020; VBG
2021). Germany’s state-specific IPAs as well as handouts of the competent administrations and other initiatives (Berlin Hygienic Framework Concept
2022; AGVSb
2020) provide guidance for visitor safety at events. The interaction of the involved groups—employees, participants, and visitors—is always considered when there is person-to-person visitor contact throughout the event. In the pandemic safety protocols, precautions are aligned with the protection targets. Consequently, employees fulfill a double function when it comes to infection control. They are both the target of the planned precautions and the involved groups in the implementation of precautions when handling visitors and participants. Employees are required to monitor compliance with these precautions and to step in if visitors fail to comply.
The planned precautions can be split into technical, organizational, and personal.
Technical precautions are those that minimize a hazard at the source.
Organizational precautions eliminate a risk by defining procedures, and
personal precautions provide individual protection against a hazard. Applicable law allows that technical precautions are to be preferred to organizational precautions and the latter to personal precautions. The requirements, such as maintaining a physical distance of 1.50 m at all times, can be implemented, for example, by technical precautions such as blocking off seating areas, or by organizational precautions such as downsized attendance allowed to simultaneously enter the site, or designated pathways (IPA
2022).
Three-dimensional evaluation model for the analysis of infection control protocols
ICPs are required in both the federal state-specific and nationwide levels in the IPA. Protocols should specify precautions for
2.
recording the chains of infection (by recording personal data using an app, paper documentation, etc.),
3.
minimizing the risk of infection,
4.
defining safety protocols,
5.
defining how employees, participants, and visitors will be informed about these precautions, and
6.
monitoring the implementation of precautions (IPA
2022).
Entry control: The ICP must specify how entry is to be restricted for the attendance allowed, which type of certificates are considered a valid proof of status (vaccinated, recovered, tested) and what format (analog, digital), and how to respond to disruptions. Technical/structural precautions (separation, early entry) and organizational precautions (number of entry gates and staffing) must be taken into account.
Minimizing potential centers of infection by rapid detection of chains of infection: This requires end-to-end documentation of personal data of employees, participants, and visitors throughout all stages of the event (set-up, rehearsals, entry, performance, exit, and assembly). Under Section 2, Article 16 of the Infection Control Act, personal data include the following: surname and first name, gender, date of birth, address of the main residence or usual address and, if different, current address of the person concerned and, if available, telephone number and e-mail address. The federal states’ IPAs and SARS-CoV-2 control govern the filing of personal data in different ways. What they have in common is the event organizer’s obligation to record personal data, to save them for the span of four weeks in a manner protected from access by third parties, and to delete them after four weeks have passed (digital documentation) or to destroy it (analog documentation). The data have to be handed over to the competent authority on request in cases where it is established that a person was ill, suspected of being ill, infectious, or a carrier as specified in the Infection Control Act applicable at the time of the event, visit, or use of the service. The data may be used exclusively for contact tracing consistent with infection control legislation, that is to say, only with express permission for advertising campaigns and information about other events. Which data are to be filed, however, varies between the state-specific IPAs.
Minimizing the risk of infection: This included a comprehensive overview of all technical-structural, organizational, and personnel precautions (TOP) pre-event, mid-event, and post-event (entry, event, end), with specific consideration given to attendance, visitor loads, ventilation, social distance requirements, and mouth-nose coverage. To this end, the state-specific IPA needs to be complied with, with municipalities authorized to add their own regulations to these codes.
ICP: The ICP for events lays down precautions for cleaning or disinfecting repeatedly used spaces, providing disinfection facilities for event-goers at the entrance area, and safety precautions for employees and participants, especially for person-to-person visitor contact. The obligation to prepare a health protocol is primarily enshrined in the federal states’ IPAs or Corona or SARS-CoV-2 control. Additionally, municipal bodies or other organizations such as the regional chambers of commerce and industry issue recommendations.
Information and control: Officials of the competent authority and the public health department are authorized to carry out investigations and to monitor the required precautions. A person responsible for on-site health and safety should expect the precautions laid down in the protocol to be checked at any time, and must ensure that employees, participants, and visitors comply with the required precautions in order, on the one hand, not to violate the duty of care and, on the other hand, not to risk regulatory penalties or to risk the event being cancelled. This requires, on the one hand, visitor compliance supported by explanations and information, and, on the other hand, competent and authorized members of staff making sure that precautions are observed, and intervening if they are violated (Winkelmann and Sakschewski
2021).