Mpox in Children and Adolescents during Multicountry Outbreak, 2022-2023.

The 2022-2023 mpox outbreak predominantly affected adult men; 1.3% of reported cases were in children and adolescents <18 years of age. Analysis of global surveillance data showed 1 hospital intensive care unit admission and 0 deaths in that age group. Transmission routes and clinical manifestations varied across age subgroups.

Description of the first global outbreak of mpox: an analysis of global surveillance data.

BACKGROUND: In May 2022, several countries with no history of sustained community transmission of mpox (formerly known as monkeypox) notified WHO of new mpox cases. These cases were soon followed by a large-scale outbreak, which unfolded across the world, driven by local, in-country transmission within previously unaffected countries. On July 23, 2022, WHO declared the outbreak a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. Here, we aim to describe the main epidemiological features of this outbreak, the largest reported to date. METHODS: In this analysis of global surveillance data we analysed data for all confirmed mpox cases reported by WHO Member States through the global surveillance system from Jan 1, 2022, to Jan 29, 2023. Data included daily aggregated numbers of mpox cases by country and a case reporting form (CRF) containing information on demographics, clinical presentation, epidemiological exposure factors, and laboratory testing. We used the data to (1) describe the key epidemiological and clinical features of cases; (2) analyse risk factors for hospitalisation (by multivariable mixed-effects binary logistic regression); and (3) retrospectively analyse transmission trends. Sequencing data from GISAID and GenBank were used to analyse monkeypox virus (MPXV) genetic diversity. FINDINGS: Data from 82 807 cases with submitted CRFs were included in the analysis. Cases were primarily due to clade IIb MPXV (mainly lineage B.1, followed by lineage A.2). The outbreak was driven by transmission among males (73 560 [96·4%] of 76 293 cases) who self-identify as men who have sex with men (25 938 [86·9%] of 29 854 cases). The most common reported route of transmission was sexual contact (14 941 [68·7%] of 21 749). 3927 (7·3%) of 54 117 cases were hospitalised, with increased odds for those aged younger than 5 years (adjusted odds ratio 2·12 [95% CI 1·32-3·40], p=0·0020), aged 65 years and older (1·54 [1·05-2·25], p=0·026), female cases (1·61 [1·35-1·91], p<0·0001), and for cases who are immunosuppressed either due to being HIV positive and immunosuppressed (2·00 [1·68-2·37], p<0·0001), or other immunocompromising conditions (3·47 [1·84-6·54], p=0·0001). INTERPRETATION: Continued global surveillance allowed WHO to monitor the epidemic, identify risk factors, and inform the public health response. The outbreak can be attributed to clade IIb MPXV spread by newly described modes of transmission. FUNDING: WHO Contingency Fund for Emergencies. TRANSLATIONS: For the French and Spanish translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

The World Health Organization COVID-19 surveillance database.

In January 2020, SARS-CoV-2 virus was identified as a cause of an outbreak in China. The disease quickly spread worldwide, and the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the pandemic in March 2020.From the first notifications of spread of the disease, the WHO's Emergency Programme implemented a global COVID-19 surveillance system in coordination with all WHO regional offices. The system aimed to monitor the spread of the epidemic over countries and across population groups, severity of the disease and risk factors, and the impact of control measures. COVID-19 surveillance data reported to WHO is a combination of case-based data and weekly aggregated data, focusing on a minimum global dataset for cases and deaths including disaggregation by age, sex, occupation as a Health Care Worker, as well as number of cases tested, and number of cases newly admitted for hospitalization. These disaggregations aim to monitor inequities in COVID-19 distribution and risk factors among population groups.SARS-CoV-2 epidemic waves continue to sweep the world; as of March 2022, over 445 million cases and 6 million deaths have been reported worldwide. Of these, over 327 million cases (74%) have been reported in the WHO surveillance database, of which 255 million cases (57%) are disaggregated by age and sex. A public dashboard has been made available to visualize trends, age distributions, sex ratios, along with testing and hospitalization rates. It includes a feature to download the underlying dataset.This paper will describe the data flows, database, and frontend public dashboard, as well as the challenges experienced in data acquisition, curation and compilation and the lessons learnt in overcoming these. Two years after the pandemic was declared, COVID-19 continues to spread and is still considered a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). While WHO regional and country offices have demonstrated tremendous adaptability and commitment to process COVID-19 surveillance data, lessons learnt from this major event will serve to enhance capacity and preparedness at every level, as well as institutional empowerment that may lead to greater sharing of public health evidence during a PHEIC, with a focus on equity.

United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention support for influenza surveillance, 2013-2021.

Objective: To assess the stability of improvements in global respiratory virus surveillance in countries supported by the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) after reductions in CDC funding and with the stress of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Methods: We assessed whether national influenza surveillance systems of CDC-funded countries: (i) continued to analyse as many specimens between 2013 and 2021; (ii) participated in activities of the World Health Organization's (WHO) Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System; (iii) tested enough specimens to detect rare events or signals of unusual activity; and (iv) demonstrated stability before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. We used CDC budget records and data from the WHO Global Influenza Surveillance and Response System. Findings: While CDC reduced per-country influenza funding by about 75% over 10 years, the number of specimens tested annually remained stable (mean 2261). Reporting varied substantially by country and transmission zone. Countries funded by CDC accounted for 71% (range 61-75%) of specimens included in WHO consultations on the composition of influenza virus vaccines. In 2019, only eight of the 17 transmission zones sent enough specimens to WHO collaborating centres before the vaccine composition meeting to reliably identify antigenic variants. Conclusion: Great progress has been made in the global understanding of influenza trends and seasonality. To optimize surveillance to identify atypical influenza viruses, and to integrate molecular testing, sequencing and reporting of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 into existing systems, funding must continue to support these efforts.

A call for standardised age-disaggregated health data.

The 2030 Sustainable Development Goals agenda calls for health data to be disaggregated by age. However, age groupings used to record and report health data vary greatly, hindering the harmonisation, comparability, and usefulness of these data, within and across countries. This variability has become especially evident during the COVID-19 pandemic, when there was an urgent need for rapid cross-country analyses of epidemiological patterns by age to direct public health action, but such analyses were limited by the lack of standard age categories. In this Personal View, we propose a recommended set of age groupings to address this issue. These groupings are informed by age-specific patterns of morbidity, mortality, and health risks, and by opportunities for prevention and disease intervention. We recommend age groupings of 5 years for all health data, except for those younger than 5 years, during which time there are rapid biological and physiological changes that justify a finer disaggregation. Although the focus of this Personal View is on the standardisation of the analysis and display of age groups, we also outline the challenges faced in collecting data on exact age, especially for health facilities and surveillance data. The proposed age disaggregation should facilitate targeted, age-specific policies and actions for health care and disease management.

Comparison of common acute respiratory infection case definitions for identification of hospitalized influenza cases at a population-based surveillance site in Egypt.

BACKGROUND: Multiple case definitions are used to identify hospitalized patients with community-acquired acute respiratory infections (ARI). We evaluated several commonly used hospitalized ARI case definitions to identify influenza cases. METHODS: The study included all patients from a population-based surveillance site in Damanhour, Egypt hospitalized for a broad set of criteria consistent with community acquired ARIs. Naso- and oropharyngeal (NP/OP) swabs were tested for influenza using RT-PCR. Sensitivity, specificity and PPV for influenza identification was compared between the 2014 WHO Severe Acute Respiratory Infection (SARI) definition (fever ≥38°C and cough with onset within 10 days), the 2011 WHO SARI definition (fever ≥38°C and cough with onset within 7 days), the 2006 PAHO SARI definition, the International Emerging Infections Program (IEIP) pneumonia case definition, and the International Management of Childhood Illness (IMCI) case definitions for moderate and severe pneumonia. RESULTS: From June 2009-December 2012, 5768 NP/OP swabs were obtained from 6113 hospitalized ARI patients; 799 (13.9%) were influenza positive. The 2014 WHO SARI case definition captured the greatest number of ARI patients, influenza positive patients and ARI deaths compared to the other case definitions examined. Sensitivity for influenza detection was highest for the 2014 WHO SARI definition with 88.6%, compared to the 2011 WHO SARI (78.2%) the 2006 PAHO SARI (15.8%) the IEIP pneumonia (61.0%) and the IMCI moderate and severe pneumonia (33.8% and 38.9%) case definitions (IMCI applies to <5 only). CONCLUSIONS: Our results support use of the 2014 WHO SARI definition for identifying influenza positive hospitalized SARI cases as it captures the highest proportion of ARI deaths and influenza positive cases. Routine use of this case definition for hospital-based surveillance will provide a solid, globally comparable foundation on which to build needed response efforts for novel pandemic viruses.

Global Seasonal Influenza Mortality Estimates: A Comparison of 3 Different Approaches.

Prior to updating global influenza-associated mortality estimates, the World Health Organization convened a consultation in July 2017 to understand differences in methodology and implications for results of 3 influenza mortality projects from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Netherlands Institute for Health Service Research's Global Pandemic Mortality Project II (GLaMOR), and the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME). The expert panel reviewed estimates and discussed differences in data sources, analysis, and modeling assumptions. We performed a comparison analysis of the estimates. Influenza-associated respiratory death counts were comparable between CDC and GLaMOR; the IHME estimate was considerably lower. The greatest country-specific influenza-associated fold differences in mortality rate between CDC and IHME estimates and between GLaMOR and IHME estimates were among countries in Southeast Asia and the Eastern Mediterranean region. The data envelope used for the calculation was one of the major differences (CDC and GLaMOR: all respiratory deaths; IHME: lower-respiratory infection deaths). With the assumption that there is only one cause of death for each death, IHME estimates a fraction of the full influenza-associated respiratory mortality that is measured by the other 2 groups. Wide variability of parameters was observed. Continued coordination between groups could assist with better understanding of methodological differences and new approaches to estimating influenza deaths globally.

Variability in published rates of influenza-associated hospitalizations: A systematic review, 2007-2018.

BACKGROUND: Influenza burden estimates help provide evidence to support influenza prevention and control programs at local and international levels. METHODS: Through a systematic review, we aimed to identify all published articles estimating rates of influenza-associated hospitalizations, describe methods and data sources used, and identify regions of the world where estimates are still lacking. We evaluated study heterogeneity to determine if we could pool published rates to generate global estimates of influenza-associated hospitalization. RESULTS: We identified 98 published articles estimating influenza-associated hospitalization rates from 2007-2018. Most articles (65%) identified were from high-income countries, with 34 of those (53%) presenting estimates from the United States. While we identified fewer publications (18%) from low- and lower-middle-income countries, 50% of those were published from 2015-2018, suggesting an increase in publications from lower-income countries in recent years. Eighty percent (n = 78) used a multiplier approach. Regression modelling techniques were only used with data from upper-middle or high-income countries where hospital administrative data was available. We identified variability in the methods, case definitions, and data sources used, including 91 different age groups and 11 different categories of case definitions. Due to the high observed heterogeneity across articles (I2 >99%), we were unable to pool published estimates. CONCLUSIONS: The variety of methods, data sources, and case definitions adapted locally suggests that the current literature cannot be synthesized to generate global estimates of influenza-associated hospitalization burden.

Coordinating the real-time use of global influenza activity data for better public health planning.

Health planners from global to local levels must anticipate year-to-year and week-to-week variation in seasonal influenza activity when planning for and responding to epidemics to mitigate their impact. To help with this, countries routinely collect incidence of mild and severe respiratory illness and virologic data on circulating subtypes and use these data for situational awareness, burden of disease estimates and severity assessments. Advanced analytics and modelling are increasingly used to aid planning and response activities by describing key features of influenza activity for a given location and generating forecasts that can be translated to useful actions such as enhanced risk communications, and informing clinical supply chains. Here, we describe the formation of the Influenza Incidence Analytics Group (IIAG), a coordinated global effort to apply advanced analytics and modelling to public influenza data, both epidemiological and virologic, in real-time and thus provide additional insights to countries who provide routine surveillance data to WHO. Our objectives are to systematically increase the value of data to health planners by applying advanced analytics and forecasting and for results to be immediately reproducible and deployable using an open repository of data and code. We expect the resources we develop and the associated community to provide an attractive option for the open analysis of key epidemiological data during seasonal epidemics and the early stages of an influenza pandemic.

Progress and Remaining Gaps in Estimating the Global Disease Burden of Influenza.

Influenza has long been a global public health priority because of the threat of another global pandemic. Although data are available for the annual burden of seasonal influenza in many developed countries, fewer disease burden data are available for low-income and tropical countries. In recent years, however, the surveillance systems created as part of national pandemic preparedness efforts have produced substantial data on the epidemiology and impact of influenza in countries where data were sparse. These data are leading to greater interest in seasonal influenza, including implementation of vaccination programs. However, a lack of quality data on severe influenza, nonrespiratory outcomes, and high-risk groups, as well as a need for better mathematical models and economic evaluations, are some of the major gaps that remain. These gaps are the focus of multilateral research and surveillance efforts that will strengthen global efforts in influenza control in the future.

Revision of clinical case definitions: influenza-like illness and severe acute respiratory infection.

The formulation of accurate clinical case definitions is an integral part of an effective process of public health surveillance. Although such definitions should, ideally, be based on a standardized and fixed collection of defining criteria, they often require revision to reflect new knowledge of the condition involved and improvements in diagnostic testing. Optimal case definitions also need to have a balance of sensitivity and specificity that reflects their intended use. After the 2009-2010 H1N1 influenza pandemic, the World Health Organization (WHO) initiated a technical consultation on global influenza surveillance. This prompted improvements in the sensitivity and specificity of the case definition for influenza - i.e. a respiratory disease that lacks uniquely defining symptomology. The revision process not only modified the definition of influenza-like illness, to include a simplified list of the criteria shown to be most predictive of influenza infection, but also clarified the language used for the definition, to enhance interpretability. To capture severe cases of influenza that required hospitalization, a new case definition was also developed for severe acute respiratory infection in all age groups. The new definitions have been found to capture more cases without compromising specificity. Despite the challenge still posed in the clinical separation of influenza from other respiratory infections, the global use of the new WHO case definitions should help determine global trends in the characteristics and transmission of influenza viruses and the associated disease burden.

La formulation de définitions précises de cas cliniques fait partie intégrante d'un processus efficace de surveillance de la santé publique. Alors que ces définitions devraient, dans l'idéal, s'appuyer sur un ensemble standardisé et fixe de critères de définition, elles nécessitent souvent une révision pour tenir compte des nouvelles connaissances relatives à la maladie concernée et des améliorations apportées aux tests diagnostiques. Pour être optimales, les définitions de cas doivent aussi établir un équilibre entre sensibilité et spécificité qui reflète leur utilisation aux fins prévues. À la suite de la pandémie de grippe H1N1 de 2009-2010, l'Organisation mondiale de la Santé (OMS) a lancé une consultation technique sur la surveillance mondiale de la grippe. Cela a conduit à des améliorations concernant la sensibilité et la spécificité de la définition de cas pour la grippe ­ c'est-à-dire une maladie respiratoire dont seule la symptomatologie reste à définir. Le processus de révision n'a pas seulement modifié la définition du syndrome de type grippal pour inclure une liste simplifiée des critères le mieux à même de prédire une infection grippale, il a également permis de clarifier le langage utilisé dans la définition pour en améliorer l'interprétation. Par ailleurs, afin de tenir compte des cas sévères de grippe qui nécessitaient une hospitalisation, une nouvelle définition de cas a été introduite concernant l'infection aigüe sévère des voies respiratoires dans tous les groupes d'âge. Il a été constaté que les nouvelles définitions reflétaient davantage de cas, sans pour autant compromettre la spécificité. S'il est vrai que la distinction clinique de la grippe des autres infections respiratoires continue de poser problème, l'utilisation mondiale des nouvelles définitions de cas de l'OMS devrait permettre de dégager des tendances mondiales concernant les caractéristiques et la transmission des virus grippaux ainsi que la charge de morbidité qui leur est associée.

La elaboración de definiciones precisas de los casos clínicos es una parte fundamental de un proceso efectivo de la vigilancia de la salud pública. Aunque tales definiciones deberían, idealmente, estar basadas en una recopilación estandarizada y fija de criterios de definición, a menudo necesitan una revisión para reflejar el nuevo conocimiento de la enfermedad existente y las mejoras en las pruebas de diagnóstico. Las definiciones óptimas de los casos también deben tener un equilibrio entre sensibilidad y especificidad que refleje su uso previsto. Después de la pandemia de gripe H1N1 en 2009-2010, la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) inició una consulta técnica para la vigilancia mundial de la gripe. Esto dio lugar a mejoras en la sensibilidad y la especificidad de las definiciones de los casos de gripe, es decir, una enfermedad respiratoria que carece de una sintomatología definitoria singular. El proceso de revisión no solo modificó la definición de las enfermedades similares a la gripe para incluir una lista simplificada de los criterios que demostraron ser más predictivos de la infección por gripe, sino que también aclaró el lenguaje utilizado para la definición, con el fin de mejorar su interpretación. Para englobar los casos graves de gripe que requirieron hospitalización, también se desarrolló una nueva definición de los casos de la infección respiratoria aguda grave en todos los grupos de edad. Se ha descubierto que las nuevas definiciones engloban más casos sin comprometer la especificidad. A pesar del desafío que todavía plantea la separación clínica de la gripe de otras infecciones respiratorias, el uso global de las nuevas definiciones de los casos de la OMS debería ayudar a determinar las tendencias mundiales en las características y transmisión de los virus de la gripe y la carga de la enfermedad asociada.

Influenza Seasonality in the Tropics and Subtropics - When to Vaccinate?

BACKGROUND: The timing of the biannual WHO influenza vaccine composition selection and production cycle has been historically directed to the influenza seasonality patterns in the temperate regions of the northern and southern hemispheres. Influenza activity, however, is poorly understood in the tropics with multiple peaks and identifiable year-round activity. The evidence-base needed to take informed decisions on vaccination timing and vaccine formulation is often lacking for the tropics and subtropics. This paper aims to assess influenza seasonality in the tropics and subtropics. It explores geographical grouping of countries into vaccination zones based on optimal timing of influenza vaccination. METHODS: Influenza seasonality was assessed by different analytic approaches (weekly proportion of positive cases, time series analysis, etc.) using FluNet and national surveillance data. In case of discordance in the seasonality assessment, consensus was built through discussions with in-country experts. Countries with similar onset periods of their primary influenza season were grouped into geographical zones. RESULTS: The number and period of peak activity was ascertained for 70 of the 138 countries in the tropics and subtropics. Thirty-seven countries had one and seventeen countries had two distinct peaks. Countries near the equator had secondary peaks or even identifiable year-round activity. The main influenza season in most of South America and Asia started between April and June. The start of the main season varied widely in Africa (October and December in northern Africa, April and June in Southern Africa and a mixed pattern in tropical Africa). Eight "influenza vaccination zones" (two each in America and Asia, and four in Africa and Middle East) were defined with recommendations for vaccination timing and vaccine formulation. The main limitation of our study is that FluNet and national surveillance data may lack the granularity to detect sub-national variability in seasonality patterns. CONCLUSION: Distinct influenza seasonality patterns, though complex, could be ascertained for most countries in the tropics and subtropics using national surveillance data. It may be possible to group countries into zones based on similar recommendations for vaccine timing and formulation.

Seasonal influenza vaccine policy, use and effectiveness in the tropics and subtropics - a systematic literature review.

AIM: The evidence needed for tropical countries to take informed decisions on influenza vaccination is scarce. This article reviews policy, availability, use and effectiveness of seasonal influenza vaccine in tropical and subtropical countries. METHOD: Global health databases were searched in three thematic areas - policy, availability and protective benefits in the context of human seasonal influenza vaccine in the tropics and subtropics. We excluded studies on monovalent pandemic influenza vaccine, vaccine safety, immunogenicity and uptake, and disease burden. RESULTS: Seventy-four countries in the tropics and subtropics representing 60% of the world's population did not have a national vaccination policy against seasonal influenza. Thirty-eight countries used the Northern Hemisphere and 21 countries the Southern Hemisphere formulation. Forty-six countries targeted children and 57 targeted the elderly; though, the age cut-offs varied. Influenza vaccine supply increased twofold in recent years. However, coverage remained lower than five per 1000 population. Vaccine protection against laboratory-confirmed influenza in the tropics ranged from 0% to 42% in the elderly, 20-77% in children and 50-59% in healthy adults. Vaccinating pregnant women against seasonal influenza prevented laboratory-confirmed influenza in both mothers (50%) and their infants <6 months (49-63%). CONCLUSION: Guidelines on vaccine composition, priority risk groups and vaccine availability varied widely. The evidence on vaccine protection was scarce. Countries in the tropics and subtropics need to strengthen and expand their evidence-base required for making informed decisions on influenza vaccine introduction and expansion, and how much benefit to expect.

The challenges of global case reporting during pandemic A(H1N1) 2009.

During the 2009 A(H1N1) influenza pandemic, the World Health Organization (WHO) asked all Member States to provide case-based data on at least the first 100 laboratory-confirmed influenza cases to generate an early understanding of the pandemic and provide appropriate guidance to affected countries. In reviewing the pandemic surveillance strategy, we evaluated the utility of case-based data collection and the challenges in interpreting these data at the global level. To do this, we assessed compliance with the surveillance recommendation and data completeness of submitted case records and described the epidemiological characteristics of up to the first 110 reported cases from each country, aggregated into regions. From April 2009 to August 2011, WHO received over 18 000 case records from 84 countries. Data reached WHO at different time intervals, in different formats and without information on collection methods. Just over half of the 18 000 records gave the date of symptom onset, which made it difficult to assess whether the cases were among the earliest to be confirmed. Descriptive epidemiological analyses were limited to summarizing age, sex and hospitalization ratios. Centralized analysis of case-based data had little value in describing key features of the pandemic. Results were difficult to interpret and would have been misleading if viewed in isolation. A better approach would be to identify critical questions, standardize data elements and methods of investigation, and create efficient channels for communication between countries and the international public health community. Regular exchange of routine surveillance data will help to consolidate these essential channels of communication.

Pendant la pandémie de grippe à virus A(H1N1) de l'année 2009, l'Organisation mondiale de la Santé (OMS) a demandé à tous les États membres de fournir les données par cas sur au moins les 100 premiers cas de grippe confirmés en laboratoire afin d'obtenir une compréhension précoce de la pandémie et de fournir les directives appropriées aux pays touchés. En examinant la stratégie de surveillance de la pandémie, nous avons évalué l'utilité de la collecte des données par cas et les défis à relever dans l'interprétation de ces données au niveau mondial. Pour ce faire, nous avons évalué le respect des recommandations en matière de surveillance et l'exhaustivité des données des dossiers des cas soumis, et nous avons décrit les caractéristiques épidémiologiques des 110 premiers cas signalés de chaque pays, regroupés en régions. Sur la période allant d'avril 2009 à août 2011, l'OMS a reçu plus de 18 000 dossiers de cas fournis par 84 pays. Les données sont parvenues à l'OMS à différents intervalles de temps, sous différents formats et sans informations sur les méthodes de collecte. À peine plus de la moitié des 18 000 dossiers a donné la date d'apparition des symptômes, ce qui ne permet pas d'évaluer si les cas reçus faisaient partie des premiers cas à être confirmés. Les analyses épidémiologiques descriptives se sont limitées à synthétiser les rapports d'âge, de masculinité et d'hospitalisation. L'analyse centralisée des données par cas n'a que très peu de valeur dans la description des principales caractéristiques de la pandémie. Les résultats sont difficiles à interpréter et pourraient induire en erreur s'ils sont pris isolément. Une meilleure approche consisterait à identifier les questions essentielles, à normaliser les éléments des données et les méthodes d'investigation, et à créer des canaux efficaces de communication entre les pays et la communauté de la santé publique internationale. Les échanges réguliers de données de surveillance de routine aideront à consolider ces canaux de communication essentiels.

Durante la pandemia de gripe A (H1N1) del año 2009, la Organización Mundial de la salud (OMS) pidió a todos los Estados miembros que proporcionaran datos de hasta los primeros 100 casos de gripe confirmados en laboratorios con objeto de comprender con rapidez la pandemia y proporcionar orientación adecuada a los países afectados. Con objeto de examinar la estrategia de vigilancia de la pandemia, hemos evaluado la utilidad de la recogida de datos sobre casos y los desafíos que supuso la interpretación de esos datos a nivel internacional. Para ello, evaluamos el cumplimiento con las recomendaciones de vigilancia y la integridad de los datos de los registros enviados y describimos las características epidemiológicas de, como mucho, los 110 primeros casos de cada país, agrupados por regiones. Entre abril de 2009 y agosto de 2011, la OMS recibió más de 18 000 registros de casos de 84 países en intervalos de tiempo y formatos distintos, y sin información alguna sobre los métodos de recogida. Solo algo más de la mitad de los 18 000 registros indicaba la fecha de aparición de los síntomas, lo que dificultó evaluar si los casos se encontraban entre los primeros que se confirmaron. Los análisis epidemiológicos descriptivos se limitaron a resumir las proporciones por edad, sexo y hospitalización. Los análisis centralizados de datos sobre casos tuvieron poco valor en la descripción de las características fundamentales de la epidemia. Fue difícil interpretar los resultados, que habrían resultado engañosos si se hubieran observado de forma aislada. Un enfoque más apropiado permitiría identificar las cuestiones críticas, estandarizar los datos y los métodos de investigación, y crear canales de comunicación entre los países y la comunidad sanitaria internacional. El intercambio regular de datos de vigilancia rutinarios ayudará a consolidar dichos canales de comunicación fundamentales.

Epidemiologic and virologic assessment of the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) pandemic on selected temperate countries in the Southern Hemisphere: Argentina, Australia, Chile, New Zealand and South Africa.

UNLABELLED: INTRODUCTION AND SETTING: Our analysis compares the most comprehensive epidemiologic and virologic surveillance data compiled to date for laboratory-confirmed H1N1pdm patients between 1 April 2009 - 31 January 2010 from five temperate countries in the Southern Hemisphere-Argentina, Australia, Chile, New Zealand, and South Africa. OBJECTIVE: We evaluate transmission dynamics, indicators of severity, and describe the co-circulation of H1N1pdm with seasonal influenza viruses. RESULTS: In the five countries, H1N1pdm became the predominant influenza strain within weeks of initial detection. South Africa was unique, first experiencing a seasonal H3N2 wave, followed by a distinct H1N1pdm wave. Compared with the 2007 and 2008 influenza seasons, the peak of influenza-like illness (ILI) activity in four of the five countries was 3-6 times higher with peak ILI consultation rates ranging from 35/1,000 consultations/week in Australia to 275/100,000 population/week in New Zealand. Transmission was similar in all countries with the reproductive rate ranging from 1.2-1.6. The median age of patients in all countries increased with increasing severity of disease, 4-14% of all hospitalized cases required critical care, and 26-68% of fatal patients were reported to have ≥1 chronic medical condition. Compared with seasonal influenza, there was a notable downward shift in age among severe cases with the highest population-based hospitalization rates among children <5 years old. National population-based mortality rates ranged from 0.8-1.5/100,000. CONCLUSIONS: The difficulty experienced in tracking the progress of the pandemic globally, estimating its severity early on, and comparing information across countries argues for improved routine surveillance and standardization of investigative approaches and data reporting methods.

Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever cases in Turkey.

Crimean-Congo haemorrhagic fever (CCHF) is an arbovirus infection, which is transmitted through ticks or via blood and secretions. Until recently, human cases of CCHF were unknown in Turkey; however, several acute disease cases were reported in 2002. We report on the investigation of a cluster of suspected CCHF cases in the middle part of the Black Sea from May 2002 to October 2003. The medical charts that we reviewed were obtained from all local physicians and our field investigations. 'Suspected case' was defined with regard to time, place, and both clinical and laboratory characteristics. A total of 108 patients were defined as suspected case. Among them 36 patients were reached and blood samples taken for examination for CCHF by using ELISA and RT-PCR. According to the laboratory analysis, 80.6% (29/36) were acute cases and 8.3% (3/36) were past CCHF infections. The overall mortality rate was 5.6%. There was no nosocomial infection; however, there were 2 family clusters. Tick exposure was the most prevalent risk factor (74.2%). A multidisciplinary collaboration should be developed in order to understand the magnitude of the disease and also to keep it under control.

Safety of the yellow fever vaccine during the September 2001 mass vaccination campaign in Abidjan, Ivory Coast.

In 2001, a vaccination campaign against yellow fever was carried out in Abidjan, Cote d'Ivoire. During the campaign and 4 weeks after an active surveillance system for adverse events following immunization (AEFI) was set up. More then 2.6 million doses were administered and 87 AEFI were notified. Eight suspected YF cases were reported after vaccination and considered as AEFI. However, none had IgM for YF and all recovered without sequels. This surveillance system provided reassuring data about the safety of the YF vaccine and proved that it is feasible to set up an active surveillance system during a mass campaign.

Ensuring injection safety during measles immunization campaigns: more than auto-disable syringes and safety boxes.

Measles immunization campaigns are effective elements of a comprehensive strategy for preventing measles cases and deaths. However, if immunizations are not properly administered or if immunization waste products are not safely managed, there is the potential to transmit bloodborne pathogens (e.g., human immunodeficiency virus and hepatitis B and hepatitis C). A safe injection can be defined as one that results in no harm to the recipient, the vaccinator, and the surrounding community. Proper equipment, such as the exclusive use of auto-disable syringes and safety boxes, is necessary, but these alone are not sufficient to ensure injection safety in immunization campaigns. Equally important are careful planning and managerial activities that include policy and strategy development, financing, budgeting, logistics, training, supervision, and monitoring. The key elements that must be in place to ensure injection safety in measles immunization campaigns are outlined.