Abstract
Aim To study how different bans on serving alcohol in Norwegian bars and restaurants were related to the detection of SARS-CoV-2 in bartenders and waiters.
Methods In 24,276 bartenders and waiters and 1,287,970 persons with other occupations (mean [SD] age 41.7 [12.8] years and 51.7% men), we examined the weekly rates of workers tested and detected with SARS-CoV-2, one to five weeks before and one to five weeks after implementation of different degrees of bans on serving alcohol in pubs and restaurants, across 56 Norwegian municipalities with: 1) full blanket ban, 2) partial ban with hourly restrictions (e.g. from 10 pm), or 3) no ban, adjusted for age, sex and testing behavior.
Results In municipalities introducing full ban, COVID-19 among bartenders and waiters had been reduced by 65% by three weeks (from 3.4 [95%CI=2.5-4.3] to 1.2 [95%CI=0.7-1.7] per 1000), i.e. to the same levels as that for persons with other occupations (1.8 [95%CI=1.7-1.9] vs 1.2 [95%CI=1.1-1.3] per 1000). Similarly, in municipalities introducing partial ban, COVID-19 among bartenders and waiters had been reduced by 68% by three weeks (from 2.5 [95%CI=1.4-3.6] to 0.8 [95%CI=0.0-1.5] per 1000). However, there was more uncertainty to the estimated reduction for partial bans.
Conclusion Municipalities with higher levels of confirmed COVID-19 among bartenders and waiters implemented stricter bans on serving of alcohol than other municipalities. Contraction of COVID-19 among bartenders and waiters declined similarly in municipalities with full and partial bans.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The study was funded by the Norwegian Institute of Public Health. No external funding was received.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Institutional board review was conducted, and the Ethics Committee of South-East Norway confirmed (June 4th 2020, #153204) that external ethical board review was not required. From our ethics committee application: Knowledge of transmission, health service use and hospitalization for different geographic groups (e.g. municipality), in particular health personnel, teachers and childcare workers, waiters, taxi drivers etc. is crucial for the emergency preparedness nationally and locally. Of particular importance are occupational risks for health personnel and others working in the health services, and how the authorities' measures to limit transmission (school lock downs, restrictions on travel, social distancing etc.) impacts transmission to e.g. teachers, childcare workers, hairdressers, taxi drivers etc. Further, it is important to study other sociodemographic factors of whom are being tested (age, sex, geography, etc.) and whom are testing positive (virus and antibodies), as well as how the testing and the results are within families.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data are not publicly available.