Socioeconomic differences in the reduction of face-to-face contacts in the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany

Abstract

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has led to physical distancing measures to control the spread of SARS-CoV-2. Evidence on contact dynamics in different socioeconomic groups is still sparse. This study aimed to investigate the association of socioeconomic status with private and professional contact reductions in the first COVID-19 wave in Germany. Methods Data from two especially affected municipalities were derived from the population-based cross-sectional seroepidemiological CORONA-MONITORING lokal study (data collection May–July 2020). The study sample (n = 3,637) was restricted to working age (18–67 years). We calculated the association of educational and occupational status (low, medium, high) with self-reported private and professional contact reductions with respect to former contact levels in the first wave of the pandemic. Multivariate Poisson regressions were performed to estimate prevalence ratios (PR) adjusted for municipality, age, gender, country of birth, household size, contact levels before physical distancing measures, own infection status, contact to SARS-CoV-2 infected people and working remotely. Results The analyses showed significant differences in the initial level of private and professional contacts by educational and occupational status. Less private contact reductions with lower educational status (PR low vs. high = 0,79 [CI = 0.68–0.91], p = 0.002; PR medium vs. high = 0,93 [CI = 0.89–0.97], p = 0.001) and less professional contact reductions with lower educational status (PR low vs. high = 0,87 [CI = 0.70–1.07], p = 0.179; PR medium vs. high = 0,89 [CI = 0.83–0.95], p = 0.001) and lower occupational status (PR low vs. high = 0,62 [CI = 0.55–0.71], p < 0.001; PR medium vs. high = 0,82 [CI = 0.77–0.88], p < 0.001) were observed. Conclusions Our results indicate disadvantages for groups with lower socioeconomic status in private and professional contact reductions in the first wave of the pandemic. This may be associated with the higher risk of infection among individuals in lower socioeconomic groups. Preventive measures that a) adequately explain the importance of contact restrictions with respect to varying living and working conditions and b) facilitate the implementation of these reductions especially in the occupational setting seem necessary to better protect structurally disadvantaged groups during epidemics.

Socioeconomic Differences in SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Vaccination in Germany: A Seroepidemiological Study After One Year of COVID-19 Vaccination Campaign

“…A conceptual framework by Bambra [ 11 ] proposes unequal exposure (e.g., through opportunities to work from home), unequal transmission (e.g., through housing conditions) and unequal susceptibility (e.g., through comorbidities) as underlying pathways of health inequalities with emerging infectious diseases such as COVID-19. Empirically, individuals with lower SEP were less able to work from home [ 26 ], to reduce their contacts during the pandemic [ 27 ], and are generally more likely to live in crowded conditions [ 26 ]. Moreover, there are educational differences in factors such as risk perception or preventive behaviour regarding COVID-19 [ 28 ], which might contribute to a higher infection risk for low education groups.…”

Considerations and clinical management of infections in sarcoidosis

“…A report published during the height of the pandemic found higher rates of COVID-19 among patients with sarcoidosis compared to those with cancer [24]. Such rates are influenced by social contact dynamics which, during lockdown times, varied according to socio-economic status [25], and controlling for these factors is important in incidence studies for respiratory infections. Indeed, in a multisite community survey of patients with sarcoidosis, those who developed COVID-19 were substantially more likely (with an odds ratio of 27) to have contact with an infected roommate compared to patients not reporting an infection [26].…”

„Gemeinsam Wandel gestalten“: Tagungsbericht vom Kongress Armut und Gesundheit 2023

“…Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass es im Infektionsgeschehen eine wichtige Rolle spielte, welche Möglichkeiten die einzelnen Menschen hatten, die vorgeschriebenen oder empfohlenen Maßnahmen zum Infektionsschutz umzusetzen. Menschen aus geringer qualifizierten und statusniedrigeren Berufsgruppen hatten beispielsweise weniger Gelegenheit, ihre beruflichen Kontakte zu reduzieren und ins Homeoffice zu wechseln [ 8 ]. Je nach beruflichem Anforderungsniveau war auch das COVID-19-Erkrankungsrisiko ungleich verteilt – zu Ungunsten von Berufstätigen ohne Leitungsfunktionen und statusniedrigeren Berufsgruppen mit helfenden Tätigkeiten [ 9 ].…”