ABSTRACT
Since its introduction in December of 2019, SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 disease, has rapidly spread across the world. Whilst vaccines are being rolled out, non-pharmaceutical interventions remain the most important tools for mitigating the spread of SARS-CoV-2. Quantifying the impact of these measures as well as determining what settings are prone to instigating (super)spreading events is important for informed and safe reopening of spaces and the targeting of interventions. Mathematical models can help decipher the complex interactions that underlie virus transmission. Currently, most mathematical models developed during the COVID-19 epidemic evaluate interventions at national or subnational levels. Smaller scales of transmission, such as at the level of indoor spaces, have received less attention, despite the central role they play in both transmission and control. Models that do act on this scale use simplified descriptions of human behavior, impeding a valid quantitative analysis of the impact of interventions on transmission in indoor spaces, particularly those that aim for physical distancing. To more accurately predict the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 through a pedestrian environment, we introduce a model that links pedestrian movement and choice dynamics with SARS-CoV-2 spreading models.
The objective of this paper is to investigate the spread of SARS-CoV-2 in indoor spaces as it arises from human interactions and assess the relative impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions thereon. We developed a world-wide unique combined Pedestrian Dynamics - Virus Spread model (PeDViS model), which combines insights from pedestrian modelling, epidemiology, and IT-design. In particular, an expert-driven activity assignment model is coupled with the microscopic simulation model (Nomad) and a virus spread model (QVEmod).
We first describe the non-linear relationships between the risks of exposure to the virus and the duration, distance, and context of human interactions. We compared virus exposure relative to a benchmark contact (1.5meters for 15 minutes): a threshold often used by public health agencies to determine ‘at risk’ contacts. We discuss circumstances under which individuals that adhere to common distancing measures may nevertheless be at risk. Specifically, we illustrate the stark increase in exposure at shorter distances, as well as longer contact durations. These risks increase when the infected individual was present in the space before the interaction occurred, as a result of buildup of virus in the environment. The latter is particularly true in poorly ventilated spaces and highlights the importance of good ventilation to prevent potential virus exposure through indirect transmission routes. Combining intervention tools that target different routes of transmission can aid in accumulating impact. We use face masks as an example, which are particularly effective at reducing virus spread that is not affected by ventilation. We then demonstrate the use of PeDViS using a simple restaurant case study, focussing on transmission between guests. In this setting the exposure risk to individuals that are not seated at the same table is limited, but guests seated at nearby tables are estimated to experience exposure risks that surpass that of the benchmark contact. These risks are larger in low ventilation scenarios. Lastly, we illustrate that the impact of intervention measures on the number of new infections heavily depends on the relative efficiency of the direct and indirect transmission routes considered. This uncertainty should be considered when assessing the risks of transmission upon different types of human interactions in indoor spaces.
The PeDViS case study shows the multi-dimensionality of SARS-CoV-2 that emerges from the interplay of human behaviour and the spread of respiratory viruses in indoor spaces. A modelling strategy that incorporates this in risk assessments can be an important tool to inform policy makers and citizens. It can empower them to make better design and policy decisions pertaining to the most effective use of measures to limit the spread of SARS-CoV-2 and safely open up indoor spaces.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This publication is part of the project SamenSlimOpen (with project number 10430022010018 of the research programme COVID-19 Programma, which is financed by the Dutch Research Council (NWO) and ZonMw.
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:
not applicable
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
Footnotes
Email addresses: d.c.duives{at}tudelft.nl (Dorine Duives), quirine.tenbosch{at}wur.nl (Quirine ten Bosch)
Data Availability
All code will be made available at the time of publication.
