Transmission dynamics of COVID-19 in household and community settings in the United Kingdom, January to March 2020.

BackgroundHouseholds appear to be the highest risk setting for COVID-19 transmission. Large household transmission studies in the early stages of the pandemic in Asia reported secondary attack rates ranging from 5 to 30%.AimWe aimed to investigate the transmission dynamics of COVID-19 in household and community settings in the UK.MethodsA prospective case-ascertained study design based on the World Health Organization FFX protocol was undertaken in the UK following the detection of the first case in late January 2020. Household contacts of cases were followed using enhanced surveillance forms to establish whether they developed symptoms of COVID-19, became confirmed cases and their outcomes. We estimated household secondary attack rates (SAR), serial intervals and individual and household basic reproduction numbers. The incubation period was estimated using known point source exposures that resulted in secondary cases.ResultsWe included 233 households with two or more people with 472 contacts. The overall household SAR was 37% (95% CI: 31-43%) with a mean serial interval of 4.67 days, an R0 of 1.85 and a household reproduction number of 2.33. SAR were lower in larger households and highest when the primary case was younger than 18 years. We estimated a mean incubation period of around 4.5 days.ConclusionsRates of COVID-19 household transmission were high in the UK for ages above and under 18 years, emphasising the need for preventative measures in this setting. This study highlights the importance of the FFX protocol in providing early insights on transmission dynamics.

Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of early COVID-19 cases, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the clinical presentation, course of disease and health-care seeking behaviour of the first few hundred cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. METHODS: We implemented the World Health Organization's First Few X cases and contacts investigation protocol for COVID-19. Trained public health professionals collected information on 381 virologically confirmed COVID-19 cases from 31 January 2020 to 9 April 2020. We actively followed up cases to identify exposure to infection, symptoms and outcomes. We also collected limited data on 752 symptomatic people testing negative for COVID-19, as a control group for analyses of the sensitivity, specificity and predictive value of symptoms. FINDINGS: Approximately half of the COVID-19 cases were imported (196 cases; 51.4%), of whom the majority had recent travel to Italy (140 cases; 71.4%). Of the 94 (24.7%) secondary cases, almost all reported close contact with a confirmed case (93 cases; 98.9%), many through household contact (37 cases; 39.8%). By age, a lower proportion of children had COVID-19. Most cases presented with cough, fever and fatigue. The sensitivity and specificity of symptoms varied by age, with nonlinear relationships with age. Although the proportion of COVID-19 cases with fever increased with age, for those with other respiratory infections the occurrence of fever decreased with age. The occurrence of shortness of breath also increased with age in a greater proportion of COVID-19 cases. CONCLUSION: The study has provided useful evidence for generating case definitions and has informed modelling studies of the likely burden of COVID-19.

The impact of social and physical distancing measures on COVID-19 activity in England: findings from a multi-tiered surveillance system.

BackgroundA multi-tiered surveillance system based on influenza surveillance was adopted in the United Kingdom in the early stages of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic to monitor different stages of the disease. Mandatory social and physical distancing measures (SPDM) were introduced on 23 March 2020 to attempt to limit transmission.AimTo describe the impact of SPDM on COVID-19 activity as detected through the different surveillance systems.MethodsData from national population surveys, web-based indicators, syndromic surveillance, sentinel swabbing, respiratory outbreaks, secondary care admissions and mortality indicators from the start of the epidemic to week 18 2020 were used to identify the timing of peaks in surveillance indicators relative to the introduction of SPDM. This timing was compared with median time from symptom onset to different stages of illness and levels of care or interactions with healthcare services.ResultsThe impact of SPDM was detected within 1 week through population surveys, web search indicators and sentinel swabbing reported by onset date. There were detectable impacts on syndromic surveillance indicators for difficulty breathing, influenza-like illness and COVID-19 coding at 2, 7 and 12 days respectively, hospitalisations and critical care admissions (both 12 days), laboratory positivity (14 days), deaths (17 days) and nursing home outbreaks (4 weeks).ConclusionThe impact of SPDM on COVID-19 activity was detectable within 1 week through community surveillance indicators, highlighting their importance in early detection of changes in activity. Community swabbing surveillance may be increasingly important as a specific indicator, should circulation of seasonal respiratory viruses increase.

Improving feedback of surveillance data on antimicrobial consumption, resistance and stewardship in England: putting the data at your Fingertips.

The provision of better access to and use of surveillance data is a key component of the UK 5 Year Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) Strategy. Since April 2016, PHE has made data on practice (infection prevention and control; antimicrobial stewardship) and outcome (prevalence of AMR, antibiotic use and healthcare-associated infections) available through Fingertips, a publicly accessible web tool (https://fingertips.phe.org.uk/profile/amr-local-indicators). Fingertips provides access to a wide range of public health data presented as thematic profiles, with the above data being available through the 'AMR local indicators' profile. Local data on a range of indicators can be viewed at the level of National Health Service acute trusts, Clinical Commissioning Groups or general practitioner practices, all of which can be compared with the corresponding aggregate values for England to allow benchmarking. The data can be viewed in a range of formats including an overview showing counts and rates, interactive maps, spine charts and graphs that show temporal trends over a range of time scales or allow correlations between pairs of indicators. The aim of the AMR local indicators profile on Fingertips is to support the development of local action plans to optimize antibiotic prescribing and reduce AMR and healthcare-associated infections. Provision of access to relevant information in an easy to use format will help local stakeholders, including healthcare staff, commissioners, Directors of Public Health, academics and the public, to benchmark relevant local AMR data and to monitor the impact of local initiatives to tackle AMR over time.

Trends in surgical site infections following orthopaedic surgery.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review presents an update on recent findings relating to the prevention, control and epidemiology of infections following orthopaedic surgery. RECENT FINDINGS: Trends in population rates and characteristics of patients undergoing hip and knee replacement surgery, coupled with the reported excess infection risk in obese patients, emphasize the current and future impact of increasing population obesity on healthcare delivery. SUMMARY: Prevention of orthopaedic infection is dependent on elimination or optimal management of documented risk factors. Guidelines and quality standards play a key role in translating this evidence base into a framework of practices for the prevention of surgical site infections. Increasing levels of orthopaedic infection due to Enterobacteriaceae, coupled with an increasingly obese surgical population may necessitate a reassessment of antimicrobial prophylaxis strategies.

A comparative study of influenza surveillance systems and administrative data in England during the 2022-2023 season.

Accurate and representative surveillance is essential for understanding the impact of influenza on healthcare systems. During the 2022-2023 influenza season, the Northern Hemisphere experienced its most significant epidemic wave since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. Concurrently, new surveillance systems, developed in response to the pandemic, became available within health services. In this study, we analysed per capita admission rates from National Health Service hospital Trusts across four surveillance systems in England during the winter of 2022-2023. We examined differences in reporting timeliness, data completeness, and regional coverage, modelling key epidemic metrics including the maximum admission rates, cumulative seasonal admissions, and growth rates by fitting generalised additive models at national and regional levels. From modelling the admission rates per capita, we find that different surveillance systems yield varying estimates of key epidemiological metrics, both spatially and temporally. While national data from these systems generally align on the maximum admission rate and growth trends, discrepancies emerge at the subnational level, particularly in the cumulative admission rate estimates, with notable issues observed in London and the East of England. The rapid growth and decay phases of the epidemic contributed to higher uncertainty in these estimates, especially in regions with variable data quality. The study highlights that the choice of surveillance system can significantly influence the interpretation of influenza trends, especially at the subnational level, where regional disparities may mask true epidemic dynamics. Comparing multiple data sources enhances our understanding of the impact of seasonal influenza epidemics and highlights the limitations of relying on a single system.

An intercountry comparison of the impact of the paediatric live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) programme across the UK and the Republic of Ireland (ROI), 2010 to 2017.

Background: The universal paediatric live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) programme commenced in the United Kingdom (UK) in 2013/2014. Since 2014/2015, all pre-school and primary school children in Scotland and Northern Ireland have been offered the vaccine. England and Wales incrementally introduced the programme with additional school age cohorts being vaccinated each season. The Republic of Ireland (ROI) had no universal paediatric programme before 2017. We evaluated the potential population impact of vaccinating primary school-aged children across the five countries up to the 2016/2017 influenza season. Methods: We compared rates of primary care influenza-like illness (ILI) consultations, confirmed influenza intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, and all-cause excess mortality using standardised methods. To further quantify the impact, a scoring system was developed where each weekly rate/z-score was scored and summed across each influenza season according to the weekly respective threshold experienced in each country. Results: Results highlight ILI consultation rates in the four seasons' post-programme, breached baseline thresholds once or not at all in Scotland and Northern Ireland; in three out of the four seasons in England and Wales; and in all four seasons in ROI. No differences were observed in the seasons' post-programme introduction between countries in rates of ICU and excess mortality, although reductions in influenza-related mortality were seen. The scoring system also reflected similar results overall. Conclusions: Findings of this study suggest that LAIV vaccination of primary school age children is associated with population-level benefits, particularly in reducing infection incidence in primary care.

Rapid influenza molecular testing in secondary care and influenza surveillance in England: Any impact?

INTRODUCTION: The use of rapid molecular testing for influenza diagnosis is becoming increasingly popular. Used at the point of care or in a clinical laboratory, these tests detect influenza A and B viruses, though many do not distinguish between influenza A subtypes. The UK Severe Influenza Surveillance System (USISS) collects surveillance data on laboratory-confirmed influenza admissions to secondary care in England. This study set out to understand how rapid influenza molecular testing was being used and how it might influence the availability of subtyping data collected on influenza cases admitted to secondary care in England. METHODS: At the end of the 2017/2018 and 2018/2019 influenza seasons, a questionnaire was sent to all National Health Service Hospital Trusts in England to evaluate the use of rapid influenza testing. Surveillance data collected through USISS was analysed from 2011/2012 to 2020/2021. RESULTS: Of responding trusts, 42% (13/31) in 2017/2018 and 55% (9/17) in 2018/2019 used rapid influenza molecular tests, either alone or in combination with other testing. The majority of rapid tests used did not subtype the influenza A result, and limited follow-up testing occurred. Surveillance data showed significant proportions of influenza A hospital and intensive care unit/high dependency unit admissions without subtyping information, increasing by approximately 35% between 2012/2013 and 2020/2021. CONCLUSIONS: The use of rapid influenza molecular tests is a likely contributing factor to the large proportion of influenza A hospitalisations in England that were unsubtyped. Given their clear clinical advantages, further work must be done to reinforce these data for public health through integrated genomic surveillance.

Trends in COVID-19 hospital outcomes in England before and after vaccine introduction, a cohort study.

Widespread vaccination campaigns have changed the landscape for COVID-19, vastly altering symptoms and reducing morbidity and mortality. We estimate trends in mortality by month of admission and vaccination status among those hospitalised with COVID-19 in England between March 2020 to September 2021, controlling for demographic factors and hospital load. Among 259,727 hospitalised COVID-19 cases, 51,948 (20.0%) experienced mortality in hospital. Hospitalised fatality risk ranged from 40.3% (95% confidence interval 39.4-41.3%) in March 2020 to 8.1% (7.2-9.0%) in June 2021. Older individuals and those with multiple co-morbidities were more likely to die or else experienced longer stays prior to discharge. Compared to unvaccinated people, the hazard of hospitalised mortality was 0.71 (0.67-0.77) with a first vaccine dose, and 0.56 (0.52-0.61) with a second vaccine dose. Compared to hospital load at 0-20% of the busiest week, the hazard of hospitalised mortality during periods of peak load (90-100%), was 1.23 (1.12-1.34). The prognosis for people hospitalised with COVID-19 in England has varied substantially throughout the pandemic and according to case-mix, vaccination, and hospital load. Our estimates provide an indication for demands on hospital resources, and the relationship between hospital burden and outcomes.

Impact of COVID-19 vaccination program on seroprevalence in blood donors in England, 2021.

The COVID-19 vaccination programme commenced in England on 8th December 2020 primarily based on age; by 7th March 2021 approximately 93% of the English population aged 70+ years had received at least 1 dose of either the Pfizer BioNTech or AstraZeneca vaccines. Using a nucleoprotein assay that detects antibodies following natural infection only and a spike assay that detects infection and vaccine-induced responses, we aim to describe the impact of vaccination on SARS-CoV-2 antibody prevalence in English blood donors.

Is It Valid to Compare Surgical Site Infections Rates Between Countries? Insights From a Study of English and Norwegian Surveillance Systems.

OBJECTIVE To assess whether differences in surveillance methods or underlying populations significantly influence internationally reported national SSI rates by comparing surveillance data from 2 countries. DESIGN Retrospective cohort. SETTING England and Norway. METHODS We assessed the population under surveillance and surveillance methodology to compare SSI rates in 2 countries (September 2012-January 2015) for 4 surgical categories: coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), colon surgery, cholecystectomy, and hip prosthesis (HPRO). We compared the inpatient SSI incidence using logistic regression, adjusting for the following known risk factors: sex, age, ASA score, wound class, postoperative hospital days, and operation duration. Subsequently, we restricted further analyses to the procedures reported by both countries. RESULTS There were important differences in case definitions for superficial infection, so we restricted our analyses to deep incisional and organ-space SSIs. For CABG, the crude odds ratio (OR) for England compared to Norway was 2.4 (95% CI, 1.4-4.4), whereas adjusted OR (aOR) lost significance (aOR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.57-2.0). For colon surgery the decreased odds (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56-0.81) remained significant after adjustment (aOR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.34-0.51). We found no associations for cholecystectomy. For HPRO, the crude OR suggested no significant difference (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.72-2.1), whereas the aOR was significantly lower in England (aOR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.25-0.81). Including only the subset of procedures reported by both countries yielded comparable results. CONCLUSION Differences in case definitions and population under surveillance in the English and Norwegian SSI surveillance systems affected SSI estimates, making the comparison of crude rates unreliable. Standardized definitions and adjustment for established risk factors are essential for European comparisons to guide related public health actions. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2017;38:162-171.

PCR characterization and typing of Klebsiella pneumoniae using capsular type-specific, variable number tandem repeat and virulence gene targets.

A multiplex PCR is described which detects capsular types K1, K2, K5, K54 and K57, which are those most associated with invasive disease or pathogenicity, a further capsular type (K20), two putative virulence factors (rmpA and wcaG) and the 16S-23S internal transcribed spacer unit of Klebsiella pneumoniae, facilitating identification of this organism. wcaG encodes capsular fucose production and was associated with capsular types K1 and K54, but was also found in strains of other capsular types; 18 of the 543 isolates screened were PCR-positive for this gene. An eight-locus variable number tandem repeat (VNTR) scheme was designed, which provided discrimination at a level similar to that afforded by PFGE among a panel of 36 isolates representing 29 PFGE types. All isolates tested of the virulent K1 clone of CC23, associated with pyogenic liver abscesses, shared the same VNTR profile, which may be helpful in identifying this clone; such isolates were also PCR-positive for allS. These methods provide a rapid means of characterizing and typing isolates of this important agent of community-acquired and nosocomial infection.

Influenza vaccine uptake in adults aged 50-64 years: policy and practice in England 2003/2004.

A small national study was carried out in England in 2003/2004 to ascertain the views of primary care trusts (PCTs) and general practitioners (GPs) on whether influenza immunisation should be extended to all people aged 50-64 years from the current recommendation of 65 years or more. Results showed that as many primary care trusts would be in favour, as would not be in favour. A similarly divided view was expressed by general practitioners. Vaccine uptake rates for high-risk (HR) and low-risk (LR) adults aged 50-64 years in the study population were higher in those practices where the GP was in favour of a more inclusive policy of offering flu vaccine to all persons aged 50 years or more, compared with those that did not favour this policy (60% versus 54% HR (p=0.02) and 16% versus 11% LR (p=0.02)). Higher rates of vaccine uptake for low-risk patients aged 50-64 years were also reported from practices where GPs perceived a greater health benefit of immunisation for this age group. Although policy for recommending vaccine to all patients aged 50 years or more is established elsewhere, opinion on whether such a policy should be adopted in England is currently divided amongst those providing local health services.