Public health and economic benefits of seasonal influenza vaccination in risk groups in France, Italy, Spain and the UK: state of play and perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Seasonal influenza epidemics have a substantial public health and economic burden, which can be alleviated through vaccination. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends a 75% vaccination coverage rate (VCR) in: older adults (aged ≥ 65 years), individuals with chronic conditions, pregnant women, children aged 6-24 months and healthcare workers. However, no European country achieves this target in all risk groups. In this study, potential public health and economic benefits achieved by reaching 75% influenza VCR was estimated in risk groups across four European countries: France, Italy, Spain, and the UK. METHODS: A static epidemiological model was used to estimate the averted public health and economic burden of increasing the 2021/2022 season VCR to 75%, using the efficacy data of standard-dose quadrivalent influenza vaccine. For each country and risk group, the most recent data on population size, VCR, pre-pandemic influenza epidemiology, direct medical costs and absenteeism were identified through a systematic literature review, supplemented by manual searching. Outcomes were: averted influenza cases, general practitioner (GP) visits, hospitalisations, case fatalities, number of days of work lost, direct medical costs and absenteeism-related costs. RESULTS: As of the 2021/2022 season, the UK achieved the highest weighted VCR across risk groups (65%), followed by Spain (47%), France (44%) and Italy (44%). Based on modelling, the 2021/2022 VCR prevented an estimated 1.9 million influenza cases, avoiding 375,200 GP visits, 73,200 hospitalisations and 38,400 deaths. To achieve the WHO 75% VCR target, an additional 24 million at-risk individuals would need to be vaccinated, most of which being older adults and patients with chronic conditions. It was estimated that this could avoid a further 918,200 influenza cases, 332,000 GP visits, 16,300 hospitalisations and 6,300 deaths across the four countries, with older adults accounting for 52% of hospitalisations and 80% of deaths. An additional €84 million in direct medical costs and €79 million in absenteeism costs would be saved in total, with most economic benefits delivered in France. CONCLUSIONS: Older adults represent most vaccine-preventable influenza cases and deaths, followed by individuals with chronic conditions. Health authorities should prioritise vaccinating these populations for maximum public health and economic benefits.

National influenza surveillance systems in five European countries: a qualitative comparative framework based on WHO guidance.

BACKGROUND: Influenza surveillance systems vary widely between countries and there is no framework to evaluate national surveillance systems in terms of data generation and dissemination. This study aimed to develop and test a comparative framework for European influenza surveillance. METHODS: Surveillance systems were evaluated qualitatively in five European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom) by a panel of influenza experts and researchers from each country. Seven surveillance sub-systems were defined: non-medically attended community surveillance, virological surveillance, community surveillance, outbreak surveillance, primary care surveillance, hospital surveillance, mortality surveillance). These covered a total of 19 comparable outcomes of increasing severity, ranging from non-medically attended cases to deaths, which were evaluated using 5 comparison criteria based on WHO guidance (granularity, timing, representativeness, sampling strategy, communication) to produce a framework to compare the five countries. RESULTS: France and the United Kingdom showed the widest range of surveillance sub-systems, particularly for hospital surveillance, followed by Germany, Spain, and Italy. In all countries, virological, primary care and hospital surveillance were well developed, but non-medically attended events, influenza cases in the community, outbreaks in closed settings and mortality estimates were not consistently reported or published. The framework also allowed the comparison of variations in data granularity, timing, representativeness, sampling strategy, and communication between countries. For data granularity, breakdown per risk condition were available in France and Spain, but not in the United Kingdom, Germany and Italy. For data communication, there were disparities in the timeliness and accessibility of surveillance data. CONCLUSIONS: This new framework can be used to compare influenza surveillance systems qualitatively between countries to allow the identification of structural differences as well as to evaluate adherence to WHO guidance. The framework may be adapted for other infectious respiratory diseases.

A comparison of coronavirus disease 2019 and seasonal influenza surveillance in five European countries: France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: In response to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak that unfolded across Europe in 2020, the World Health Organisation (WHO) called for repurposing existing influenza surveillance systems to monitor COVID-19. This analysis aimed to compare descriptively the extent to which influenza surveillance systems were adapted and enhanced and how COVID-19 surveillance could ultimately benefit or disrupt routine influenza surveillance. METHODS: We used a previously developed framework in France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom to describe COVID-19 surveillance and its impact on influenza surveillance. The framework divides surveillance systems into seven subsystems and 20 comparable outcomes of interest and uses five evaluation criteria based on WHO guidance. Information on influenza and COVID-19 surveillance systems were collected from publicly available resources shared by European and national public health agencies. RESULTS: Overall, non-medically attended, virological, primary care and mortality surveillance were adapted in most countries to monitor COVID-19, although community, outbreak and hospital surveillance were reinforced in all countries. Data granularity improved, with more detailed demographic and medical information recorded. A shift to systematic notification for cases and deaths enhanced both geographic and population representativeness, although the sampling strategy benefited from the roll out of widespread molecular testing. Data communication was greatly enhanced, contributing to improved public awareness. CONCLUSIONS: Well-established influenza surveillance systems are a key component of pandemic preparedness, and their upgrade allowed European countries to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, uncertainties remain on how both influenza and COVID-19 surveillance can be jointly and durably implemented.

Vaccination in pregnancy against pertussis and seasonal influenza: key learnings and components from high-performing vaccine programmes in three countries: the United Kingdom, the United States and Spain.

BACKGROUND: Pertussis and seasonal influenza are responsible for significant maternal, neonatal, and infant morbidity and mortality, but vaccine coverage rates (VCR) for both pertussis (administered as a tetanus, diphtheria, acellular pertussis [Tdap] vaccination) and seasonal influenza in pregnancy remain generally low. Only a small number of countries, including Spain, the United Kingdom (UK), and the United States (US), have high Tdap and seasonal influenza VCRs in pregnancy. The purpose of this study was to identify the key factors that contributed to the high VCRs observed in these countries. METHODS: The experience from both Tdap and seasonal influenza vaccination programmes during pregnancy were documented in Spain, the UK, and the US using a three-step approach. A literature review yielded 157 publications, and a further 117 documents were selected through desk research. A published five-pillar VCR framework for influenza was amended to evaluate the specific contributing factors leading to high Tdap and seasonal influenza VCRs among pregnant women. RESULTS: The analysis identified components that contributed to higher VCR in pregnant women across three different healthcare systems in Spain, UK, and US. The combination of several key interventions in each country led to a rapid increase in VCR that reached near-optimal levels (i.e. 75% for seasonal influenza) within a few years. As well as inclusion in national immunisation programme and vaccine reimbursement, key components that were identified included the mobilisation of health authorities, prenatal care Healthcare Professionals (HCP) and scientific societies, the inclusion of vaccination in antenatal medical guidance, the provision of educational material to HCPs, and a strong disease awareness driven by recent pertussis outbreaks in each country. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is no simple, universal solution to improving sub-optimal VCRs, the list of components identified in this study from three countries with high-performing Tdap and seasonal influenza vaccination programmes provides a basis for public health and medical stakeholders in other countries to define strategies to successfully implement national vaccination programmes for pregnant women.

Experience from five Asia-Pacific countries during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic: Mitigation strategies and epidemiology outcomes.

BACKGROUND: With no vaccines or specific treatments, non-pharmaceutical interventions are the only tools for controlling the human-to-human transmission of the COVID-19 disease, which appeared in Wuhan, China last December and has spread globally since. Here we describe and compare the first-wave mitigation strategies and epidemiology of five Asia-Pacific countries that responded rapidly to the epidemic. METHODS: From January to April 2020, mitigation measures and epidemiological data for Singapore, South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, Hong Kong were screened from official local government websites and a review of investigational studies was conducted. Daily case reports and mitigation measures information were extracted. Epidemiological estimates were calculated and compared between countries. RESULTS: All five countries combined measures, focusing on contact tracing, testing, isolation efforts and healthcare management. Epidemiological data varied temporally and geographically: incubation period ranged 3.9-7.1 days, effective reproduction number at time t (Rt) ranged 0.48-1.5, with intensive care admissions 1-3% of hospitalised patients, and case fatality rates were 0.1-3%. Extrinsic estimates to the virus were lower than global estimates. CONCLUSION: Implemented mitigation strategies in these countries allowed a rapid and successful control or delay of the first COVID-19 pandemic wave. These are valuable examples to inform subsequent waves.

Comparison of influenza surveillance systems in Australia, China, Malaysia and expert recommendations for influenza control.

BACKGROUND: The Western Pacific Region (WPR) is exposed each year to seasonal influenza and is often the source of new influenza virus variants and novel pathogen emergence. National influenza surveillance systems play a critical role in detecting emerging viruses, monitoring influenza epidemics, improving public disease awareness and promoting pandemic preparedness, but vary widely across WPR countries. The aim of this study is to improve existing influenza surveillance systems by systematically comparing selected WPR influenza surveillance systems. METHODS: Three national influenza surveillance systems with different levels of development (Australia, China and Malaysia) were compared and their adherence to World Health Organization (WHO) guidance was evaluated using a structured framework previously tested in several European countries consisting of seven surveillance sub-systems, 19 comparable outcomes and five evaluation criteria. Based on the results, experts from the Asia-Pacific Alliance for the Control of Influenza (APACI) issued recommendations for the improvement of existing surveillance systems. RESULTS: Australia demonstrated the broadest scope of influenza surveillance followed by China and Malaysia. In Australia, surveillance tools covered all sub-systems. In China, surveillance did not cover non-medically attended respiratory events, primary care consultations, and excess mortality modelling. In Malaysia, surveillance consisted of primary care and hospital sentinel schemes. There were disparities between the countries across the 5 evaluation criteria, particularly regarding data granularity from health authorities, information on data representativeness, and data communication, especially the absence of publicly available influenza epidemiological reports in Malaysia. This dual approach describing the scope of surveillance and evaluating the adherence to WHO guidance enabled APACI experts to make a number of recommendations for each country that included but were not limited to introducing new surveillance tools, broadening the use of specific existing surveillance tools, collecting and sharing data on virus characteristics, developing immunization status registries, and improving public health communication. CONCLUSIONS: Influenza monitoring in Australia, China, and Malaysia could benefit from the expansion of existing surveillance sentinel schemes, the broadened use of laboratory confirmation and the introduction of excess-mortality modelling. The results from the evaluation can be used as a basis to support expert recommendations and to enhance influenza surveillance capabilities.

Key policy and programmatic factors to improve influenza vaccination rates based on the experience from four high-performing countries.

BACKGROUND: Many countries consistently fail to achieve the target influenza vaccine coverage rate (VCR) of 75% for populations at risk of complications, recommended by the World Health Organization and European Council. We aimed to identify factors for achieving a high VCR in the scope of four benchmark countries with high influenza VCRs: Australia, Canada, UK and USA. METHODS: Publicly available evidence was first reviewed at a global level and then for each of the four countries. Semi-structured interviews were then conducted with stakeholders meeting predefined criteria. Descriptive cluster analyses were performed to identify key factors and pillars for establishing and maintaining high VCRs. RESULTS: No single factor led to a high VCR, and each benchmark country used a different combination of tailored approaches to achieve a high vaccine coverage. In each country, specific triggers were important to stimulate changes that led to improved vaccine coverage. A total of 42 key factors for a successful influenza vaccination programme were identified and clustered into five pillars: (1) Health Authority accountability and strengths of the influenza programme, (2) facilitated access to vaccination, (3) healthcare professional accountability and engagement, (4) awareness of the burden and severity of disease and (5) belief in influenza vaccination benefit. Each benchmark country has implemented multiple factors from each pillar. CONCLUSION: A wide range of factors were identified from an evaluation of four high-performing benchmark countries, classified into five pillars, thus providing a basis for countries with lower VCRs to tailor their own particular solutions to improve their influenza VCR.