Fatalities associated with the 2009 H1N1 influenza A virus in New York city.

BACKGROUND. When the 2009 H1N1 influenza A virus emerged in the United States, epidemiologic and clinical information about severe and fatal cases was limited. We report the first 47 fatal cases of 2009 H1N1 influenza in New York City. METHODS. The New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene conducted enhanced surveillance for hospitalizations and deaths associated with 2009 H1N1 influenza A virus. We collected basic demographic and clinical information for all patients who died and compared abstracted data from medical records for a sample of hospitalized patients who died and hospitalized patients who survived. RESULTS. From 24 April through 1 July 2009, 47 confirmed fatal cases of 2009 H1N1 influenza were reported to the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. Most decedents (60%) were ages 18-49 years, and only 4% were aged 65 years. Many (79%) had underlying risk conditions for severe seasonal influenza, and 58% were obese according to their body mass index. Thirteen (28%) had evidence of invasive bacterial coinfection. Approximately 50% of the decedents had developed acute respiratory distress syndrome. Among all hospitalized patients, decedents had presented for hospitalization later (median, 3 vs 2 days after illness onset; P < .05) and received oseltamivir later (median, 6.5 vs 3 days; P < .01) than surviving patients. Hospitalized patients who died were less likely to have received oseltamivir within 2 days of hospitalization than hospitalized patients who survived (61% vs 96%; P < .01). CONCLUSIONS. With community-wide transmission of 2009 H1N1 influenza A virus, timely medical care and antiviral therapy should be considered for patients with severe influenza-like illness or with underlying risk conditions for complications from influenza.

Effect of timing of amantadine chemoprophylaxis on severity of outbreaks of influenza a in adult long-term care facilities.

BACKGROUND: Long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are vulnerable to outbreaks of influenza. There are limited data on the impact of antiviral chemoprophylaxis on the duration of outbreaks of influenza. We investigated the association of timely initiation of amantadine chemoprophylaxis on the duration and severity of outbreaks of influenza A in LTCFs in New York, New York. METHODS: Outbreaks of influenza A occurring from October through May each year during the period 2001-2004 in LTCFs in New York were defined as a single laboratory-confirmed case or a cluster of > or = 2 cases of influenza-like illness on a unit of an LTCF. For those facilities that provided amantadine chemoprophylaxis, we examined the association between the time to initiation of chemoprophylaxis after outbreak onset and duration of outbreak, incidence rate, and case-fatality proportion using simple t tests, multivariate analyses of covariance, and linear regression modeling. RESULTS: Adjusting for influenza season year, facility bed capacity, and the proportion of residents who were vaccinated against influenza, LTCFs that initiated chemoprophylaxis 15 days after outbreak onset (25 facilities) had significantly longer duration of outbreaks (18.3 vs. 6.7 days; P < .001), higher incidence rates (10.5 cases per 100 residents vs. 6.2 cases per 100 residents; P < .023), and higher case-fatality rates (3.3 deaths per 100 residents with influenza A vs. 0.45 deaths per 100 residents with influenza A; P < .005) than did LTCFs that initiated chemoprophylaxis 5 days after outbreak onset (27 facilities). CONCLUSIONS: LTCFs that initiated chemoprophylaxis >5 days after initiation of outbreaks of influenza A had significantly longer outbreaks, significantly higher incidence rates, and significantly higher case-fatality rates. These data support prompt initiation of amantadine chemoprophylaxis after identification of influenza A in LTCFs.

Building-level analyses to prospectively detect influenza outbreaks in long-term care facilities: New York City, 2013-2014.

BACKGROUND: Timely outbreak detection is necessary to successfully control influenza in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) and other institutions. To supplement nosocomial outbreak reports, calls from infection control staff, and active laboratory surveillance, the New York City (NYC) Department of Health and Mental Hygiene implemented an automated building-level analysis to proactively identify LTCFs with laboratory-confirmed influenza activity. METHODS: Geocoded addresses of LTCFs in NYC were compared with geocoded residential addresses for all case-patients with laboratory-confirmed influenza reported through passive surveillance. An automated daily analysis used the geocoded building identification number, approximate text matching, and key-word searches to identify influenza in residents of LTCFs for review and follow-up by surveillance coordinators. Our aim was to determine whether the building analysis improved prospective outbreak detection during the 2013-2014 influenza season. RESULTS: Of 119 outbreaks identified in LTCFs, 109 (92%) were ever detected by the building analysis, and 55 (46%) were first detected by the building analysis. Of the 5,953 LTCF staff and residents who received antiviral prophylaxis during the 2013-2014 season, 929 (16%) were at LTCFs where outbreaks were initially detected by the building analysis. CONCLUSIONS: A novel building-level analysis improved influenza outbreak identification in LTCFs in NYC, prompting timely infection control measures.

Sputum induction problems identified through genetic fingerprinting.

OBJECTIVE: To identify the contamination source of a cluster of eight positive Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolates from one laboratory session. METHODS: Spoligotyping was performed on M. tuberculosis isolates processed during one laboratory session. Laboratory and sputum induction protocols and records were reviewed. Sputum induction staff were interviewed. An environmental assessment of the sputum induction booth was performed. RESULTS: Spoligotyping identified a unique strain of susceptible M. tuberculosis from five induced sputa collected at Clinic A on the same day. Three specimens processed concurrently from other clinics had spoligotypes different from each other and from the cluster strain. A laboratory investigation revealed no procedural lapses. Sputum induction records from Clinic A indicated that patient 1 in the sputum induction booth had prior culture-confirmed tuberculosis. Patient 2 had a history of a drug-resistant strain. Patient 3 had completed tuberculosis treatment, with positive cultures 7 months earlier. Patients 4 and 5 were new to the clinic and had no subsequent positive M. tuberculosis specimens. The sputum induction booth was working within normal parameters. Sputum induction that day was overseen by a new employee with limited training and no supervision. A review of the sputum induction protocol identified ambiguity regarding care of the ultrasonic nebulizer between patients, which may have led to reuse of the discarded nebulizer solution from patient 1. CONCLUSIONS: A break in the sputum induction protocol may have contributed to contamination of patient specimens. Sputum induction is complicated, mandating adequate staff training and supervision and patient preparation. Spoligotyping identified a potential source of M. tuberculosis contamination.

An unexpected benefit from enhanced 2009 H1N1 influenza surveillance.

Nosocomial outbreaks of influenza are reportable in New York State, but reporting compliance is unknown. We describe a surveillance system, instituted during the 2009 H1N1 outbreak, that coincidently allowed for the identification of influenza outbreaks in long-term care facilities.

Persistence of a highly resistant strain of tuberculosis in New York City during 1990-1999.

One multidrug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis (MDRTB) strain, strain W, caused several nosocomial outbreaks in New York City (NYC) during 1 January 1990-31 July 1993. We reviewed all MDRTB cases verified during 1 August 1993-31 December 1999 that had isolates with either this DNA pattern or a variant of this strain, and we compared them to the outbreak cases. Of 427 DNA-confirmed cases from 1990-1999, 161 (37%) were from 1 August 1993-31 December 1999; these 161 cases, from 56 hospitals and 2 correctional sites, constituted 28% of all MDRTB cases in NYC during this period. Compared with those from 1 January 1990-31 July 1993, patients from 1 August 1993-31 December 1999 were less likely to be infected with human immunodeficiency virus, to have been born in the United States, to be homeless, to have been incarcerated, and to have epidemiological links; 16% of patients had nosocomial- and 9% had community-exposure links. This strain was disseminated widely in the community during the outbreaks; postoutbreak cases likely represent reactivated disease among individuals infected during the outbreak periods in the community.

Molecular epidemiology of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis, New York City, 1995-1997.

From January 1, 1995, to December 31, 1997, we reviewed records of all New York City patients who had multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDRTB); we performed insertion sequence (IS) 6110-based DNA genotyping on the isolates. Secondary genotyping was performed for low IS6110 copy band strains. Patients with identical DNA pattern strains were considered clustered. From 1995 through 1997, MDRTB was diagnosed in 241 patients; 217 (90%) had no prior treatment history, and 166 (68.9%) were born in the United States or Puerto Rico. Compared with non-MDRTB patients, MDRTB patients were more likely to be born in the United States, have HIV infection, and work in health care. Genotyping results were available for 234 patients; 153 (65.4%) were clustered, 126 (82.3%) of them in eight clusters of >or=4 patients. Epidemiologic links were identified for 30 (12.8%) patients; most had been exposed to patients diagnosed before the study period. These strains were likely transmitted in the early 1990 s when MDRTB outbreaks and tuberculosis transmission were widespread in New York.