Dataset Information

Using population-wide administrative and laboratory data to estimate type- and subtype-specific influenza vaccine effectiveness: a surveillance protocol.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:The appropriateness of using routinely collected laboratory data combined with administrative data for estimating influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) is still being explored. This paper outlines a protocol to estimate influenza VE using linked laboratory and administrative data which could act as a companion to estimates derived from other methods. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:We will use the test-negative design to estimate VE for each influenza type/subtype and season. Province-wide individual-level records of positive and negative influenza tests at the Provincial Laboratory for Public Health in Alberta will be linked, by unique personal health numbers, to administrative databases and vaccination records held at the Ministry of Health in Alberta to determine covariates and influenza vaccination status, respectively. Covariates of interests include age, sex, immunocompromising chronic conditions and healthcare setting. Cases will be defined based on an individual's first positive influenza test during the season, and potential controls will be defined based on an individual's first negative influenza test during the season. One control for each case will be randomly selected based on the week the specimen was collected. We will estimate VE using multivariable logistic regression. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:Ethics approval was obtained from the University of Alberta's Health Research Ethics Board-Health Panel under study ID Pro00075997. Results will be disseminated by public health officials in Alberta.

SUBMITTER: Scott AN

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6773297 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Using population-wide administrative and laboratory data to estimate type- and subtype-specific influenza vaccine effectiveness: a surveillance protocol.

Scott Allison Nicole AN Buchan Sarah A SA Kwong Jeffrey C JC Drews Steven J SJ Simmonds Kimberley A KA Svenson Lawrence W LW

BMJ open 20190930 9

<h4>Introduction</h4>The appropriateness of using routinely collected laboratory data combined with administrative data for estimating influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) is still being explored. This paper outlines a protocol to estimate influenza VE using linked laboratory and administrative data which could act as a companion to estimates derived from other methods.<h4>Methods and analysis</h4>We will use the test-negative design to estimate VE for each influenza type/subtype and season. Pro ...[more]

PMID: 31575570

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDespite widespread utilization of influenza vaccines, effectiveness (VE) has not been routinely measured in Latin America.MethodsWe used a case test-negative control design to estimate trivalent inactivated influenza VE against laboratory-confirmed influenza among hospitalized children aged 6months-5years and adults aged ≥60years which are age-groups targeted for vaccination. We sought persons with severe acute respiratory infections (SARI), hospitalized at 71 sentinel hospitals in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Honduras, Panama, and Paraguay during January-December 2013. Cases had an influenza virus infection confirmed by real-time reverse transcription PCR (rRT-PCR); controls had a negative rRT-PCR result for influenza viruses. We used a two-stage random effects model to estimate pooled VE per target age-group, adjusting for the month of illness onset, age and preexisting medical conditions.ResultsWe identified 2620 SARI patients across sites: 246 influenza cases and 720 influenza-negative controls aged ≤5years and 448 cases and 1206 controls aged ≥60years. The most commonly identified subtype among participants (48%) was the influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 virus followed by influenza A(H3N2) (34%) and influenza B (18%) viruses. Among children, the adjusted VE of full vaccination (one dose for previously vaccinated or two if vaccine naïve) against any influenza virus SARI was 47% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 14-71%); VE was 58% (95% CI: 16-79%) against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, and 65% (95% CI: -9; 89%) against influenza A(H3N2) viruses associated SARI. Crude VE of full vaccination against influenza B viruses associated SARI among children was 3% (95% CI: -150; 63). Among adults aged ≥60years, adjusted VE against any influenza SARI was 48% (95% CI: 34-60%); VE was 54% (95% CI: 37-69%) against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, 43% (95% CI: 18-61%) against influenza A(H3N2) and 34% (95% CI: -4; 58%) against B viruses associated SARI.ConclusionInfluenza vaccine provided moderate protection against severe influenza illness among fully vaccinated young children and older adults, supporting current vaccination strategies.

Project description:BackgroundThe effectiveness of currently licensed vaccines against influenza has not been clearly established, especially among individuals at increased risk for complications from influenza. We used a test-negative approach to estimate influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against hospitalization with laboratory-confirmed influenza based on data collected from the Global Influenza Hospital Surveillance Network (GIHSN).Methods and findingsThis was a multi-center, prospective, active surveillance, hospital-based epidemiological study during the 2012-2013 influenza season. Data were collected from hospitals participating in the GIHSN, including five in Spain, five in France, and four in the Russian Federation. Influenza was confirmed by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction. IVE against hospitalization for laboratory-confirmed influenza was estimated for adult patients targeted for vaccination and who were swabbed within 7 days of symptom onset. The overall adjusted IVE was 33% (95% confidence interval [CI], 11% to 49%). Point estimates of IVE were 23% (95% CI, -26% to 53%) for influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, 30% (95% CI, -37% to 64%) for influenza A(H3N2), and 43% (95% CI, 17% to 60%) for influenza B/Yamagata. IVE estimates were similar in subjects <65 and ≥65 years of age (35% [95% CI, -15% to 63%] vs.31% [95% CI, 4% to 51%]). Heterogeneity in site-specific IVE estimates was high (I2 = 63.4%) for A(H1N1)pdm09 in patients ≥65 years of age. IVE estimates for influenza B/Yamagata were homogenous (I2 = 0.0%).ConclusionsThese results, which were based on data collected from the GIHSN during the 2012-2013 influenza season, showed that influenza vaccines provided low to moderate protection against hospital admission with laboratory-confirmed influenza in adults targeted for influenza vaccination. In this population, IVE estimates against A(H1N1)pdm09 were sensitive to age group and study site. Influenza vaccination was moderately effective in preventing admissions with influenza B/Yamagata for all sites and age groups.

Project description:BackgroundThe Global Influenza Hospital Surveillance Network (GIHSN) aims to determine the burden of severe influenza disease and Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness (IVE). This is a prospective, active surveillance and hospital-based epidemiological study to collect epidemiological data in the GIHSN. In the 2016-2017 influenza season, 15 sites in 14 countries participated in the GIHSN, although the analyses could not be performed in 2 sites. A common core protocol was used in order to make results comparable. Here we present the results of the GIHSN 2016-2017 influenza season.MethodsA RT-PCR test was performed to all patients that accomplished the requirements detailed on a common core protocol. Patients admitted were included in the study after signing the informed consent, if they were residents, not institutionalised, not discharged in the previous 30 days from other hospitalisation with symptoms onset within the 7 days prior to admission. Patients 5 years old or more must also complied the Influenza-Like Illness definition. A test negative-design was implemented to perform IVE analysis. IVE was estimated using a logistic regression model, with the formula IVE = (1-aOR) × 100, where aOR is the adjusted Odds Ratio comparing cases and controls.ResultsAmong 21,967 screened patients, 10,140 (46.16%) were included, as they accomplished the inclusion criteria, and tested, and therefore 11,827 (53.84%) patients were excluded. Around 60% of all patients included with laboratory results were recruited at 3 sites. The predominant strain was A(H3N2), detected in 63.6% of the cases (1840 patients), followed by B/Victoria, in 21.3% of the cases (618 patients). There were 2895 influenza positive patients (28.6% of the included patients). A(H1N1)pdm09 strain was mainly found in Mexico. IVE could only be performed in 6 sites separately. Overall IVE was 27.24 (95% CI 15.62-37.27. Vaccination seemed to confer better protection against influenza B and in people 2-4 years, or 85 years old or older. The aOR for hospitalized and testing positive for influenza was 3.02 (95% CI 1.59-5.76) comparing pregnant with non-pregnant women.ConclusionsVaccination prevented around 1 in 4 hospitalisations with influenza. Sparse numbers didn't allow estimating IVE in all sites separately. Pregnancy was found a risk factor for influenza, having 3 times more risk of being admitted with influenza for pregnant women.

Project description:BackgroundThe Global Influenza Hospital Surveillance Network is an international platform whose primary objective is to study severe cases of influenza requiring hospitalization.MethodsDuring the 2015-2016 influenza season, 11 sites in the Global Influenza Hospital Surveillance Network in nine countries (Russian Federation, Czech Republic, Turkey, France, China, Spain, Mexico, India, and Brazil) participated in a prospective, active-surveillance, hospital-based epidemiological study. Influenza infection was confirmed by reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction. Influenza vaccine effectiveness (IVE) against laboratory-confirmed influenza was estimated using a test-negative approach.Results9882 patients with laboratory results were included of which 2415 (24.4%) were positive for influenza, including 1415 (14.3%) for A(H1N1)pdm09, 235 (2.4%) for A(H3N2), 180 (1.8%) for A not subtyped, 45 (0.5%) for B/Yamagata-lineage, 532 (5.4%) for B/Victoria-lineage, and 33 (0.3%) for B not subtyped. Of included admissions, 39% were < 5 years of age and 67% had no underlying conditions. The odds of being admitted with influenza were higher among pregnant than non-pregnant women (odds ratio, 2.82 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.90 to 4.19]). Adjusted IVE against influenza-related hospitalization was 16.3% (95% CI, 0.4 to 29.7). Among patients targeted for influenza vaccination, adjusted IVE against hospital admission with influenza was 16.2% (95% CI, - 3.6 to 32.2) overall, 23.0% (95% CI, - 3.3 to 42.6) against A(H1N1)pdm09, and - 25.6% (95% CI, - 86.3 to 15.4) against B/Victoria lineage.ConclusionsThe 2015-2016 influenza season was dominated by A(H1N1)pdm09 and B/Victoria-lineage. Hospitalization with influenza often occurred in healthy and young individuals, and pregnant women were at increased risk of influenza-related hospitalization. Influenza vaccines provided low to moderate protection against hospitalization with influenza and no protection against the predominant circulating B lineage, highlighting the need for more effective and broader influenza vaccines.

Dataset Information

Using population-wide administrative and laboratory data to estimate type- and subtype-specific influenza vaccine effectiveness: a surveillance protocol.

Publications

Using population-wide administrative and laboratory data to estimate type- and subtype-specific influenza vaccine effectiveness: a surveillance protocol.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets