Influenza-associated mortality in hospital care: a retrospective cohort study of risk factors and impact of oseltamivir in an English teaching hospital, 2016 to 2017.

BackgroundEvidence of an oseltamivir treatment effect on influenza A(H3N2) virus infections in hospitalised patients is incomplete.AimsThis cohort study aimed to evaluate risk factors for death among PCR-confirmed hospitalised cases of seasonal influenza A(H3N2) of all ages and the impact of oseltamivir.MethodsParticipants included all 332 PCR-confirmed influenza A(H3N2) cases diagnosed between 30 August 2016 and 17 March 2017 in an English university teaching Hospital. Oseltamivir treatment effect on odds of inpatient death was assessed by backward stepwise multivariable logistic regression analysis.ResultsThe odds of death were reduced by two thirds (odds ratio (OR): 0.32; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.11-0.93), in inpatients treated with a standard course of oseltamivir 75 mg two times daily for 5 days - compared with those untreated with oseltamivir, after adjustment for age, sex, current excess alcohol intake, receipt of 2016/17 seasonal influenza vaccine, serum haemoglobin and hospital vs community attribution of acquisition of influenza.ConclusionsOseltamivir treatment given according to National Institutes of Clinical Excellence (NICE); United States Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC); Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines was shown to be effective in reducing the odds of mortality in inpatients with PCR-confirmed seasonal influenza A(H3N2) after adjustment in a busy routine English hospital setting. Our results highlight the importance of hospitals complying with relevant guidelines for prompt seasonal influenza PCR testing and ensuring standard oseltamivir treatment to all PCR-confirmed cases of seasonal influenza.

Protection from infection and reinfection due to the Omicron BA.1 variant in care homes.

Introduction: Following the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 in 2020, care homes were disproportionately impacted by high mortality and morbidity of vulnerable elderly residents. Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) and improved infection control measures together with vaccination campaigns have since improved outcomes of infection. We studied the utility of past infection status, recent vaccination and anti-S antibody titres as possible correlates of protection against a newly emergent Omicron variant infection. Methods: Prospective longitudinal surveillance of nine sentinel London care homes from April 2020 onwards found that all experienced COVID-19 outbreaks due to Omicron (BA.1) during December 2021 and January 2022, despite extensive prior SARS-CoV-2 exposure and high COVID-19 vaccination rates, including booster vaccines (>70% residents, >40% staff). Results: Detailed investigation showed that 46% (133/288) of Omicron BA.1 infections were SARS-CoV-2 reinfections. Two and three COVID-19 vaccine doses were protective against Omicron infection within 2-9 weeks of vaccination, though protection waned from 10 weeks post-vaccination. Prior infection provided additional protection in vaccinated individuals, approximately halving the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Discussion: Anti-S antibody titre showed a dose-dependent protective effect but did not fully account for the protection provided by vaccination or past infection, indicating that other mechanisms of protection are also involved.

Oseltamivir is protective for in-patient mortality in PCR confirmed influenza B and influenza A(H3N2) infections in an historic cohort of 1,048 patients hospitalised during the 2016-17 and 2017-18 influenza seasons.

Standard course oseltamivir 75mg two times daily for five days was associated with an 82% reduction of odds of in-patient death (OR 0.18 (0.07,0.51)) compared to no oseltamivir treatment (OR 1.0 Reference) in a final multivariable logistic regression model of a retrospective cohort of PCR confirmed influenza B and influenza A (H3N2) infected patients admitted to a large UK teaching hospital in influenza seasons 2016-17 and 2017-18. No difference of protective odds for standard course oseltamivir was observed between influenza B and influenza A (H3N2) nor between influenza seasons. These observations strongly support clinical guidelines for molecular testing for respiratory viruses on admission to hospital and prompt treatment of confirmed seasonal influenza B and A with oseltamivir 75mg twice daily for five days.

Snapshot PCR surveillance for SARS-CoV-2 in hospital staff in England.

BACKGROUND: Significant nosocomial transmission of SARS-CoV-2 has been demonstrated. Understanding the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 carriage amongst HCWs at work is necessary to inform the development of HCW screening programmes to control nosocomial spread. METHODS: Cross-sectional 'snapshot' survey from April-May 2020; HCWs recruited from six UK hospitals. Participants self-completed a health questionnaire and underwent a combined viral nose and throat swab, tested by Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) for SARS-CoV-2 with viral culture on majority of positive samples. FINDINGS: Point prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 carriage across the sites was 2.0% (23/1152 participants), median cycle threshold value 35.70 (IQR:32.42-37.57). 17 were previously symptomatic, two currently symptomatic (isolated anosmia and sore throat); the remainder declared no prior or current symptoms. Symptoms in the past month were associated with threefold increased odds of testing positive (aOR 3.46, 95%CI 1.38-8.67; p = 0.008). SARS-CoV-2 virus was isolated from only one (5%) of nineteen cultured samples. A large proportion (39%) of participants reported symptoms in the past month. INTERPRETATION: The point-prevalence is similar to previous estimates for HCWs in April 2020, though a magnitude higher than in the general population. Based upon interpretation of symptom history and testing results including viral culture, the majority of those testing positive were unlikely to be infectious at time of sampling. Development of screening programmes must balance the potential to identify additional cases based upon likely prevalence, expanding the symptoms list to encourage HCW testing, with resource implications and risks of excluding those unlikely to be infectious with positive tests. FUNDING: Public Health England.