Health-seeking behavior of COVID-19 cases during the first eight weeks of the outbreak in Singapore: differences between local community and imported cases and having visits to single or multiple healthcare providers.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is a novel pandemic affecting almost all countries leading to lockdowns worldwide. In Singapore, locally-acquired cases emerged after the first wave of imported cases, and these two groups of cases may have different health-seeking behavior affecting disease transmission. We investigated differences in health-seeking behavior between locally-acquired cases and imported cases, and within the locally-acquired cases, those who saw single versus multiple healthcare providers. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of 258 patients who were diagnosed with COVID-19 from 23 January to 17 March 2020. Variables related to health-seeking behavior included number of visits prior to hospitalization, timing of the first visit, duration from symptom onset to admission, and places where the cases had at least one visit. RESULTS: Locally-acquired cases had longer duration from onset of symptoms to hospital admission (median 6 days, interquartile range [IQR] 4-9) than imported cases (median 4 days, IQR 2-7) (p < 0.001). Singapore residents were more likely to have at least one visit to private clinics and/or government-subsidized public clinics than non-residents (84.0% vs. 58.7%, p < 0.001). Among locally-acquired cases, those who sought care from a single healthcare provider had fewer visits before their hospital admissions compared with those who went to multiple providers (median 2 vs. 3, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our study indicates the need to encourage individuals to seek medical attention early on in their patient journey, particularly from the same healthcare provider. This in turn, would facilitate early detection and isolation, hence limiting local transmission and enabling better control of the COVID-19 outbreak.

The impact of healthcare worker influenza vaccination on nosocomial influenza in a tertiary hospital: an ecological study.

BACKGROUND: To protect hospitalized patients, who are more susceptible to complications of influenza, seasonal influenza vaccination of healthcare workers (HCW) has been recommended internationally. However, its effectiveness is still being debated. To assess the effectiveness of HCW influenza vaccination, we performed an ecological study to evaluate the association between healthcare worker influenza vaccination and the incidence of nosocomial influenza in a tertiary hospital within Singapore between 2013 and 2018. METHODS: Nosocomial influenza was defined as influenza among inpatients diagnosed 7 days or more after admission by laboratory testing, while healthcare worker influenza vaccination rate was defined as the proportion of healthcare workers that was vaccinated at the end of each annual seasonal vaccination exercise. A modified Poisson regression was performed to assess the association between the HCW vaccination rates and monthly nosocomial influenza incidence rates. RESULTS: Nosocomial influenza incidence rates followed the trend of non-nosocomial influenza, showing a predominant mid-year peak. Across 2,480,010 patient-days, there were 256 nosocomial influenza cases (1.03 per 10,000 patient-days). Controlling for background influenza activity and the number of influenza tests performed, no statistically significant association was observed between vaccination coverage and nosocomial influenza incidence rate although a protective effect was suggested (IRR 0.89, 95%CI:0.69-1.15, p = 0.37). CONCLUSION: No significant association was observed between influenza vaccination rates and nosocomial influenza incidence rates, although a protective effect was suggested. Aligning local HCW vaccine timing and formulation to that of the Southern Hemisphere may improve effectiveness. HCW vaccination remains important but demonstrating its effectiveness in preventing nosocomial influenza is challenging.

Living with COVID-19: The road ahead.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the world for more than a year, with multiple waves of infections resulting in morbidity, mortality and disruption to the economy and society. Response measures employed to control it have generally been effective but are unlikely to be sustainable over the long term. METHODS: We examined the evidence for a vaccine-driven COVID-19 exit strategy including academic papers, governmental reports and epidemiological data, and discuss the shift from the current pandemic footing to an endemic approach similar to influenza and other respiratory infectious diseases. RESULTS: A desired endemic state is characterised by a baseline prevalence of infections with a generally mild disease profile that can be sustainably managed by the healthcare system, together with the resumption of near normalcy in human activities. Such an endemic state is attainable for COVID-19 given the promising data around vaccine efficacy, although uncertainty remains around vaccine immunity escape in emergent variants of concern. Maintenance of non-pharmaceutical interventions remains crucial until high vaccination coverage is attained to avoid runaway outbreaks. It may also be worthwhile to de-escalate measures in phases, before standing down most measures for an endemic state. If a variant that substantially evades immunity emerges, it will need to be managed akin to a new disease threat, with pandemic preparedness and response plans. CONCLUSION: An endemic state for COVID-19, characterised by sustainable disease control measures, is likely attainable through vaccination.