Dataset Information

Reducing the impact of the next influenza pandemic using household-based public health interventions.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The outbreak of highly pathogenic H5N1 influenza in domestic poultry and wild birds has caused global concern over the possible evolution of a novel human strain [1]. If such a strain emerges, and is not controlled at source [2,3], a pandemic is likely to result. Health policy in most countries will then be focused on reducing morbidity and mortality.

Methods and findings

We estimate the expected reduction in primary attack rates for different household-based interventions using a mathematical model of influenza transmission within and between households. We show that, for lower transmissibility strains [2,4], the combination of household-based quarantine, isolation of cases outside the household, and targeted prophylactic use of anti-virals will be highly effective and likely feasible across a range of plausible transmission scenarios. For example, for a basic reproductive number (the average number of people infected by a typically infectious individual in an otherwise susceptible population) of 1.8, assuming only 50% compliance, this combination could reduce the infection (symptomatic) attack rate from 74% (49%) to 40% (27%), requiring peak quarantine and isolation levels of 6.2% and 0.8% of the population, respectively, and an overall anti-viral stockpile of 3.9 doses per member of the population. Although contact tracing may be additionally effective, the resources required make it impractical in most scenarios.

Conclusions

National influenza pandemic preparedness plans currently focus on reducing the impact associated with a constant attack rate, rather than on reducing transmission. Our findings suggest that the additional benefits and resource requirements of household-based interventions in reducing average levels of transmission should also be considered, even when expected levels of compliance are only moderate.

SUBMITTER: Wu JT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC1526768 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: In an influenza pandemic, the benefit of vaccines and antiviral medications will be constrained by limitations on supplies and effectiveness. Non-pharmaceutical public health interventions will therefore be vital in curtailing disease spread. However, the most comprehensive assessments of the literature to date recognize the generally poor quality of evidence on which to base non-pharmaceutical pandemic planning decisions. In light of the need to prepare for a possible pandemic despite concerns about the poor quality of the literature, combining available evidence with expert opinion about the relative merits of non-pharmaceutical interventions for pandemic influenza may lead to a more informed and widely accepted set of recommendations. We evaluated the evidence base for non-pharmaceutical public health interventions. Then, based on the collective evidence, we identified a set of recommendations for and against interventions that are specific to both the setting in which an intervention may be used and the pandemic phase, and which can be used by policymakers to prepare for a pandemic until scientific evidence can definitively respond to planners' needs. METHODS: Building on reviews of past pandemics and recent historical inquiries, we evaluated the relative merits of non-pharmaceutical interventions by combining available evidence from the literature with qualitative and quantitative expert opinion. Specifically, we reviewed the recent scientific literature regarding the prevention of human-to-human transmission of pandemic influenza, convened a meeting of experts from multiple disciplines, and elicited expert recommendation about the use of non-pharmaceutical public health interventions in a variety of settings (healthcare facilities; community-based institutions; private households) and pandemic phases (no pandemic; no US pandemic; early localized US pandemic; advanced US pandemic). RESULTS: The literature contained a dearth of evidence on the efficacy or effectiveness of most non-pharmaceutical interventions for influenza. In an effort to inform decision-making in the absence of strong scientific evidence, the experts ultimately endorsed hand hygiene and respiratory etiquette, surveillance and case reporting, and rapid viral diagnosis in all settings and during all pandemic phases. They also encouraged patient and provider use of masks and other personal protective equipment as well as voluntary self-isolation of patients during all pandemic phases. Other non-pharmaceutical interventions including mask-use and other personal protective equipment for the general public, school and workplace closures early in an epidemic, and mandatory travel restrictions were rejected as likely to be ineffective, infeasible, or unacceptable to the public. CONCLUSION: The demand for scientific evidence on non-pharmaceutical public health interventions for influenza is pervasive, and present policy recommendations must rely heavily on expert judgment. In the absence of a definitive science base, our assessment of the evidence identified areas for further investigation as well as non-pharmaceutical public health interventions that experts believe are likely to be beneficial, feasible and widely acceptable in an influenza pandemic.

Project description:BACKGROUND:It is unclear whether seasonal changes, school closures or other public health interventions will result in a slowdown of the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We aimed to determine whether epidemic growth is globally associated with climate or public health interventions intended to reduce transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). METHODS:We performed a prospective cohort study of all 144 geopolitical areas worldwide (375 609 cases) with at least 10 COVID-19 cases and local transmission by Mar. 20, 2020, excluding China, South Korea, Iran and Italy. Using weighted random-effects regression, we determined the association between epidemic growth (expressed as ratios of rate ratios [RRR] comparing cumulative counts of COVID-19 cases on Mar. 27, 2020, with cumulative counts on Mar. 20, 2020) and latitude, temperature, humidity, school closures, restrictions of mass gatherings, and measures of social distancing during an exposure period 14 days previously (Mar. 7 to 13, 2020). RESULTS:In univariate analyses, there were few or no associations of epidemic growth with latitude and temperature, but weak negative associations with relative humidity (RRR per 10% 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.85-0.96) and absolute humidity (RRR per 5 g/m3 0.92, 95% CI 0.85-0.99). Strong associations were found for restrictions of mass gatherings (RRR 0.65, 95% CI 0.53-0.79), school closures (RRR 0.63, 95% CI 0.52-0.78) and measures of social distancing (RRR 0.62, 95% CI 0.45-0.85). In a multivariable model, there was a strong association with the number of implemented public health interventions (p for trend = 0.001), whereas the association with absolute humidity was no longer significant. INTERPRETATION:Epidemic growth of COVID-19 was not associated with latitude and temperature, but may be associated weakly with relative or absolute humidity. Conversely, public health interventions were strongly associated with reduced epidemic growth.

Project description:Prior experience and the persisting threat of influenza pandemic indicate the need for global and local preparedness and public health response capacity. The pandemic of 2009 highlighted the importance of such planning and the value of prior efforts at all levels. Our review of the public health response to this pandemic in Pune, India, considers the challenges of integrating global and national strategies in local programmes and lessons learned for influenza pandemic preparedness.Global, national and local pandemic preparedness and response plans have been reviewed. In-depth interviews were undertaken with district health policy-makers and administrators who coordinated the pandemic response in Pune.In the absence of a comprehensive district-level pandemic preparedness plan, the response had to be improvised. Media reporting of the influenza pandemic and inaccurate information that was reported at times contributed to anxiety in the general public and to widespread fear and panic. Additional challenges included inadequate public health services and reluctance of private healthcare providers to treat people with flu-like symptoms. Policy-makers developed a response strategy that they referred to as the Pune plan, which relied on powers sanctioned by the Epidemic Act of 1897 and resources made available by the union health ministry, state health department and a government diagnostic laboratory in Pune.The World Health Organization's (WHO's) global strategy for pandemic control focuses on national planning, but state-level and local experience in a large nation like India shows how national planning may be adapted and implemented. The priority of local experience and requirements does not negate the need for higher level planning. It does, however, indicate the importance of local adaptability as an essential feature of the planning process. Experience and the implicit Pune plan that emerged are relevant for pandemic preparedness and other public health emergencies.

Project description:Public health administrators do not have effective models to predict excess influenza-associated mortality and monitor viral changes associated with it. This study evaluated the effect of matching/mismatching vaccine strains, type/subtype pattern changes in Taiwan's influenza viruses, and the impact of post-SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) public health efforts on excess influenza-associated mortalities among the elderly. A negative binomial model was developed to estimate Taiwan's monthly influenza-associated mortality among the elderly. We calculated three winter and annual excess influenza-associated mortalities [pneumonia and influenza (P&I), respiratory and circulatory, and all-cause] from the 1999-2000 through the 2006-2007 influenza seasons. Obtaining influenza virus sequences from the months/years in which death from P&I was excessive, we investigated molecular variation in vaccine-mismatched influenza viruses by comparing hemagglutinin 1 (HA1) of the circulating and vaccine strains. We found that the higher the isolation rate of A (H3N2) and vaccine-mismatched influenza viruses, the greater the monthly P&I mortality. However, this significant positive association became negative for higher matching of A (H3N2) and public health efforts with post-SARS effect. Mean excess P&I mortality for winters was significantly higher before 2003 than after that year [mean +/- S.D.: 1.44+/-1.35 vs. 0.35+/-1.13, p = 0.04]. Further analysis revealed that vaccine-matched circulating influenza A viruses were significantly associated with lower excess P&I mortality during post-SARS winters (i.e., 2005-2007) than during pre-SARS winters [0.03+/-0.06 vs. 1.57+/-1.27, p = 0.01]. Stratification of these vaccine-matching and post-SARS effect showed substantial trends toward lower elderly excess P&I mortalities in winters with either mismatching vaccines during the post-SARS period or matching vaccines during the pre-SARS period. Importantly, all three excess mortalities were at their highest in May, 2003, when inter-hospital nosocomial infections were peaking. Furthermore, vaccine-mismatched H3N2 viruses circulating in the years with high excess P&I mortality exhibited both a lower amino acid identity percentage of HA1 between vaccine and circulating strains and a higher numbers of variations at epitope B. Our model can help future decision makers to estimate excess P&I mortality effectively, select and test virus strains for antigenic variation, and evaluate public health strategy effectiveness.