Can Pubs Effectively Prevent Covid-19 Transmission Risk?

After observing a rise in the risk of COVID-19 transmission in licensed premises last summer, researchers have questioned pub operators' ability to effectively and consistently prevent its transmission. The research was conducted last //year from May to August in licensed premises, which re-opened after the nationwide lockdown, operating under detailed governmental guidance to reduce transmission risks.

Researchers found that the physical and operational modifications made by the venues varied for each place, and many concerning incidents were observed - close physical interaction between customers and staff frequently involving alcohol intoxication that was not stopped by staff.

Professor Niamh Fitzgerald, lead researcher, said, “We interviewed business owners and representatives before re-opening to understand the challenges being faced.”

She added that though businesses expressed an intention to work within the guidelines, commercial and practical challenges were to be faced.

"We concluded that despite the efforts of bar operators and guidance from the government, potentially significant risks of COVID-19 transmission persisted in at least a substantial minority of observed bars, especially when customers were intoxicated. Closures of premises can eliminate these risks, but also cause significant hardship for business owners and staff," she explains.

The guidelines given by the government were:-

Advertisement

Premises operating with a one-meter physical distancing limit had to install appropriate signage

- All customers had to be seated

Advertisement

- Staff had to wear face coverings

- Improved ventilation and noise reduction measures had to be introduced

- It was a legal requirement for customer details to be collected for contact tracing

- Guidance was strengthened around queuing, standing, and table service.

The researchers monitored the premises for up to two hours while posing as customers.The observable findings were:-

- Hand sanitizing stations were infrequently used

- Nine venues did not ask customers to provide contact details to support contact tracing

- At several venues, staff wore no PPE, wore masks inappropriately, or removed them to talk to other staff or customers

- Several venues had tables closer together without partitions.

- One-way systems, implemented to regulate the flow of customers, were sometimes ignored, and pinch points were problematic in nearly all venues

- Very few venues offered table service only to avoid any possibility of queuing for service at the bar, and, in at least one venue, a continuous queue formed in the one-meter space between tables.

- Most venues had no measures to ensure physical distancing and to limit the number of people inside toilets.

- Customers were observed to be singing, shouting, or playing music; mixing between groups; standing and moving around the bar without distancing; taking photos with other customers and staff; shaking hands or embracing others from different households.

- In Most venues, no staff intervention in incidents or attempts to enforce restrictions were observed. In some cases, staff intervened in a light-hearted way, but these were largely ineffective.

- Enforcement by external agencies (environmental health or police officers) was not observed in any venues.

However, Professor Fitzgerald adds that attention also needs to be paid to the impact of closures on businesses, economic activity, employee hardship, ownership patterns, and any risks posed by the diversion of some drinking to the home.



Source-Medindia