RISE-Vac-Co-production of Vaccine Education Materials with Persons Living in Prison.

Increasing vaccination knowledge is effective in addressing hesitancy and is particularly important in populations deprived of liberty who may not routinely have access to health information, ensuring health equity. RISE-Vac is a European Union-funded project aiming to promote vaccine literacy, offer, and uptake in prisons in Europe. We consulted persons living in prisons in the United Kingdom (through the Prisoner Policy Network), France, and Moldova to determine their vaccination knowledge gaps, the information they would like to receive, and how they would like to receive it. We received 344 responses: 224 from the United Kingdom, 70 from France, and 50 from Moldova. Participants were particularly interested in learning about the effectiveness, side effects, and manufacturing of vaccines. Their responses guided the development of educational materials, including a brochure that will be piloted in prisons in Europe. Persons with experience of imprisonment were involved at every stage of this project.

Vaccinations in prison settings: A systematic review to assess the situation in EU/EEA countries and in other high income countries.

INTRODUCTION: In 2016, more than 600,000 persons were being held in EU/EEA correctional facilities on a given day. People in prison may be at risk of vaccine-preventable diseases. While vaccination recommendations for people in prison exist, little is known on coverage and implementation options. METHODS: We performed a systematic review on existing evidence on vaccination in prison settings in the EU/EEA. We searched peer-reviewed and grey literature following international methodology and reporting standards, to gather records published between 1980 and 2016 in all languages. We analysed quantitative (acceptance, uptake, cost-effectiveness) and qualitative (barriers) outcomes. RESULTS: Out of 7041 identified records, 19 full-text articles were included from peer-reviewed literature and two from grey literature. Of these, 18 reported on hepatitis A and/or B virus (HAV/HBV), two on influenza and one on MMR vaccination. Two studies on HAV vaccine reported varying acceptance (5-91%) and uptake rates (62.9-70.5%). Seven studies reported on HBV vaccination. A comparative study showed a significantly higher uptake of the third HBV vaccine dose with the very rapid (63%) compared to the standard schedule (20%). HBV vaccination was generally well accepted (54-100%), whereas uptake was variable (dose 1:23-100%, dose 2:48-92%, dose 3:19-80%). One study on the combined HAV/HBV vaccine reported an acceptance rate of 34%, and declining uptake following dose 1. One study on influenza vaccine showed an uptake of 42-46%, while another reported a MMR vaccine acceptance of 80% and an uptake of 74%. Overall, main reasons for non-vaccination included release from/or transfer between prisons, and refusal. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review highlighted important knowledge gaps and operational challenges for vaccination in prison settings. Vaccination is an effective measure that warrants comprehensive and tailored implementation to reduce the preventable disease burden, avoid risks of large outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases, and contribute to health equity for people in prison.

Challenges and opportunities for the management of infectious diseases in Europes' prisons: evidence-based guidance.

People in prison have multiple complex health and social care needs. These are likely to be the result of a combination of overlapping, and sometimes interlinked, risk factors for infection, ill-health, and incarceration, such as problem drug use. Incarceration can represent a unique opportunity to make high-quality health care available to people in prison and to target socially deprived groups who are often medically underserved when living in the community they originate from. In recent years, international and European institutions have increasingly acknowledged the importance of treating prison health as an inseparable component of public health. However, numerous challenges hamper the successful implementation of such a concept, including the need for evidence-based decision making, intersectoral partnerships, and better monitoring systems. New initiatives are ongoing in the EU that might contribute to bring about positive changes, such as the publication of the first evidence-based public health guidance on prevention and control of communicable diseases in prison settings.

A systematic review on models of care effectiveness and barriers to Hepatitis C treatment in prison settings in the EU/EEA.

Hepatitis C prevalence in prison populations is much higher than in the community. Effective hepatitis C treatment within this population does not only have a direct individual health benefit, but may lead to substantial community dividend. We reviewed available evidence on hepatitis C treatment in prison settings, with a focus on the European Union/European Economic Area. A systematic review of the literature (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane library) was performed and complemented with searches for conference abstracts and grey literature. Thirty-four publications were included reporting on the effectiveness, acceptability and economic aspects of hepatitis C virus treatment models of care to achieve treatment completion and sustained viral response in prison settings. Available evidence shows that hepatitis C treatment in prison settings is feasible and the introduction of direct-acting antivirals will most likely result in increased treatment completion and better clinical outcomes for the prison population, given the caveats of affordability and the need for increased funding for prison health, with the resulting benefits accruing mostly in the community.

Active Case Finding for Communicable Diseases in Prison Settings: Increasing Testing Coverage and Uptake Among the Prison Population in the European Union/European Economic Area.

Prison populations are disproportionally affected by communicable diseases when compared with the general community because of a complex mix of socioeconomic determinants and environmental factors. Tailored and adequate health care provision in prisons has the potential to reach vulnerable and underserved groups and address their complex needs. We investigated the available evidence on modalities and effectiveness of active case-finding interventions in prisons by searching PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for records on prison and active case finding with no language limit. Conference abstracts and unpublished research reports also were retrieved. We analyzed the findings by testing modality, outcomes, and study quality. The included 90 records-63 peer-reviewed, 26 from gray literature, and 1 systematic review-reported variously on viral hepatitis, human immunodeficiency virus, sexually transmitted infections, and tuberculosis. No records were retrieved for other communicable diseases. Provider-initiated opt-in testing was the most frequently investigated modality. Testing at entry and provider-initiated testing were reported to result in comparatively higher uptake ranges. However, no comparative studies were identified that reported statistically significant differences between testing modalities. Positivity rates among tested inmates ranged broadly but were generally high for all diseases. The evidence on active case finding in correctional facilities is limited, heterogeneous, and of low quality, making it challenging to draw conclusions on the effect of different testing modalities. Scale-up of provider-initiated testing in European correctional facilities could substantially reduce the undiagnosed fraction and, hence, prevent additional disease transmission in both prison settings and the community at large.

HIV testing in Europe: Evaluating the impact, added value, relevance and usability of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC)'s 2010 HIV testing guidance.

BACKGROUND: An evaluation of the 2010 ECDC guidance on HIV testing, conducted in October 2015-January 2016, assessed its impact, added value, relevance and usability and the need for updated guidance. METHODS: Data sources were two surveys: one for the primary target audience (health policymakers and decision makers, national programme managers and ECDC official contact points in the European Union/European Economic Area (EU/EEA) countries and one for a broader target audience (clinicians, civil society organisations and international public health agencies); two moderated focus group discussions (17 participants each); webpage access data; a literature citation review; and an expert consultation (18 participants) to discuss the evaluation findings. RESULTS: Twenty-three of 28 primary target audience and 31 of 51 broader target audience respondents indicated the guidance was the most relevant when compared with other international guidance. Primary target audience respondents in 11 of 23 countries reported that they had used the guidance in development, monitoring and/or evaluation of their national HIV testing policy, guidelines, programme and/or strategy, and 29 of 51 of the broader target audience respondents reported having used the guidance in their work. Both the primary and broader target audience considered it important or very important to have an EU/EEA-level HIV testing guidance (23/28 and 46/51, respectively). CONCLUSION: The guidance has been widely used to develop policies, guidelines, programmes and strategies in the EU/EEA and should be regularly updated due to continuous developments in the field in order to continue to serve as an important reference guidance in the region.

New HIV diagnoses among adults aged 50 years or older in 31 European countries, 2004-15: an analysis of surveillance data.

BACKGROUND: The HIV burden is increasing in older adults in the European Union (EU) and European Economic Area (EEA). We investigated factors associated with HIV diagnosis in older adults in the 31 EU/EEA countries during a 12 year period. METHODS: In this analysis of surveillance data, we compared data from older people (aged ≥50 years) with those from younger people (aged 15-49 years). We extracted new HIV diagnoses reported to the European Surveillance System between Jan 1, 2004, and Dec 31, 2015, and stratified them by age, sex, migration status, transmission route, and CD4 cell count. We defined late diagnosis as CD4 count of less than 350 cells per µL at diagnosis and diagnosis with advanced HIV disease as less than 200 cells per µL. We compared the two age groups with the χ2 test for difference, and used linear regression analysis to assess temporal trends. FINDINGS: During the study period 54 102 new HIV diagnoses were reported in older adults. The average notification rate of new diagnoses was 2·6 per 100 000 population across the whole 12 year period, which significantly increased over time (annual average change [AAC] 2·1%, 95% CI 1·1-3·1; p=0·0009). Notification rates for new HIV diagnoses in older adults increased significantly in 16 countries in 2004-15, clustering in central and eastern EU/EEA countries. In 2015, compared with younger adults, older individuals were more likely to originate from the reporting country, to have acquired HIV via heterosexual contact, and to present late (p<0·0001 for all comparisons). HIV diagnoses increased significantly over time among older men (AAC 2·2%, 95% CI 1·2-3·3; p=0·0006), women (1·3%, 0·2-2·4; p=0·025), men who have sex with men (5·8%, 4·3-7·5; p<0·0001), and injecting drug users (7·4%, 4·8-10·2; p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: Our findings suggest that there is a compelling need to deliver more targeted testing interventions for older adults and the general adult population, such as by increasing awareness among health-care workers and expanding opportunities for provider-initiated and indicator-condition-guided testing programmes. FUNDING: European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control.

Seroprevalence and susceptibility to hepatitis A in the European Union and European Economic Area: a systematic review.

Most of the European Union (EU) and European Economic Area (EEA) is considered a region of very low hepatitis A virus (HAV) endemicity; however, geographical differences exist. We did a systematic review with the aim of describing seroprevalence and susceptibility in the general population or special groups in the EU and EEA. We searched databases and public health national institutes websites for HAV seroprevalence records published between Jan 1, 1975, and June 30, 2014, with no language restrictions. An updated search was done on Aug 10, 2016. We defined seroprevalence profiles (very low, low, and intermediate) as the proportion of the population with age-specific anti-HAV antibodies at age 15 and 30 years, and susceptibility profiles (low, moderate, high, and very high) as the proportion of susceptible individuals at age 30 and 50 years. We included 228 studies from 28 of 31 EU and EEA countries. For the period 2000-14, 24 countries had a very low seroprevalence profile, compared with five in 1975-89. The susceptibility among adults ranged between low and very high and had a geographical gradient, with three countries in the low susceptibility category. Since 1975, EU and EEA countries have shown decreasing seropositivity; however, considerable regional variability exists. The main limitations of this study are that the studies retrieved for analysis might not be representative of all EU and EEA publications about HAV and might have poor national representativeness. A large proportion of EU and EEA residents are now susceptible to HAV infection. Our Review supports the need to reconsider specific prevention and control measures, to further decrease HAV circulation while providing protection against the infection in the EU and EEA, and could be used to inform susceptible travellers visiting EU and EEA countries with different HAV endemicity levels.