Use of proxy indicators for automated surveillance of severe acute respiratory infection, the Netherlands, 2017 to 2023: a proof-of-concept study.

BackgroundEffective pandemic preparedness requires robust severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) surveillance. However, identifying SARI patients based on symptoms is time-consuming. Using the number of reverse transcription (RT)-PCR tests or contact and droplet precaution labels as a proxy for SARI could accurately reflect the epidemiology of patients presenting with SARI.AimWe aimed to compare the number of RT-PCR tests, contact and droplet precaution labels and SARI-related International Classification of Disease (ICD)-10 codes and evaluate their use as surveillance indicators.MethodsPatients from all age groups hospitalised at Leiden University Medical Center between 1 January 2017 up to and including 30 April 2023 were eligible for inclusion. We used a clinical data collection tool to extract data from electronic medical records. For each surveillance indicator, we plotted the absolute count for each week, the incidence proportion per week and the correlation between the three surveillance indicators.ResultsWe included 117,404 hospital admissions. The three surveillance indicators generally followed a similar pattern before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The correlation was highest between contact and droplet precaution labels and ICD-10 diagnostic codes (Pearson correlation coefficient: 0.84). There was a strong increase in the number of RT-PCR tests after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.DiscussionAll three surveillance indicators have advantages and disadvantages. ICD-10 diagnostic codes are suitable but are subject to reporting delays. Contact and droplet precaution labels are a feasible option for automated SARI surveillance, since these reflect trends in SARI incidence and may be available real-time.

Vaccine effectiveness against severe acute respiratory infections (SARI) COVID-19 hospitalisations estimated from real-world surveillance data, Slovenia, October 2021.

We estimated vaccine effectiveness (VE) against severe COVID-19 during October 2021, using Slovenian surveillance data. For people fully vaccinated with any vaccine in age groups 18-49, 50-64, ≥ 65 years, VE was 86% (95% CI: 79-90), 89% (85-91), and 77% (74-81). Among ≥ 65 year-olds fully vaccinated with mRNA vaccines, VE decreased from 93% (95% CI: 88-96) in those vaccinated ≤ 3 months ago to 43% (95% CI: 30-54) in those vaccinated ≥ 6 months ago, suggesting the need for early boosters.

mRNA vaccine effectiveness against hospitalisation due to severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) COVID-19 during Omicron variant predominance estimated from real-world surveillance data, Slovenia, February to March 2022.

For the period of predominance of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant in Slovenia, February to March 2022, we estimated mRNA vaccine effectiveness (VE) against severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) COVID-19 using surveillance data. In the most vulnerable age group comprising individuals aged 65 years and more, VE against SARI COVID-19 was 95% (95% CI: 95-96%) for those vaccinated with three doses, in comparison to 82% (95% CI: 79-84%) for those vaccinated with two doses. Such levels of protection were maintained for at least 6 months.

Quality of life reported by survivors after hospitalization for Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS).

INTRODUCTION: Data are lacking on impact of Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among survivors. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of MERS survivors who required hospitalization in Saudi Arabia during 2016-2017, approximately 1 year after diagnosis. The Short-Form General Health Survey 36 (SF-36) was administered by telephone interview to assess 8 quality of life domains for MERS survivors and a sample of survivors of severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) without MERS. We compared mean SF-36 scores of MERS and non-MERS SARI survivors using independent t-test, and compared categorical variables using chi-square test. Adjusted analyses were performed using multiple linear regression. RESULTS: Of 355 MERS survivors, 83 were eligible and 78 agreed to participate. MERS survivors were younger than non-MERS SARI survivors (mean ± SD): (44.9 years ±12.9) vs (50.0 years ±13.6), p = 0.031. Intensive care unit (ICU) admissions were similar for MERS and non-MERS SARI survivors (46.2% vs. 57.1%), p = 0.20. After adjusting for potential confounders, there were no significant differences between MERS and non-MERS SARI survivors in physical component or mental component summary scores. MERS ICU survivors scored lower than MERS survivors not admitted to an ICU for physical function (p = 0.05), general health (p = 0.01), vitality (p = 0.03), emotional role (p = 0.03) and physical component summary (p < 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Functional scores were similar for MERS and non-MERS SARI survivors. However, MERS survivors of critical illness reported lower quality of life than survivors of less severe illness. Efforts are needed to address the long-term medical and psychological needs of MERS survivors.

What Have We Learned About Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus Emergence in Humans? A Systematic Literature Review.

BACKGROUND: Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) was first identified in humans in 2012. A systematic literature review was conducted to synthesize current knowledge and identify critical knowledge gaps. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a systematic review on MERS-CoV using PRISMA guidelines. We identified 407 relevant, peer-reviewed publications and selected 208 of these based on their contributions to four key areas: virology; clinical characteristics, outcomes, therapeutic and preventive options; epidemiology and transmission; and animal interface and the search for natural hosts of MERS-CoV. RESULTS: Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4/CD26) was identified as the human receptor for MERS-CoV, and a variety of molecular and serological assays developed. Dromedary camels remain the only documented zoonotic source of human infection, but MERS-like CoVs have been detected in bat species globally, as well as in dromedary camels throughout the Middle East and Africa. However, despite evidence of camel-to-human MERS-CoV transmission and cases apparently related to camel contact, the source of many primary cases remains unknown. There have been sustained health care-associated human outbreaks in Saudi Arabia and South Korea, the latter originating from one traveler returning from the Middle East. Transmission mechanisms are poorly understood; for health care, this may include environmental contamination. Various potential therapeutics have been identified, but not yet evaluated in human clinical trials. At least one candidate vaccine has progressed to Phase I trials. CONCLUSIONS: There has been substantial MERS-CoV research since 2012, but significant knowledge gaps persist, especially in epidemiology and natural history of the infection. There have been few rigorous studies of baseline prevalence, transmission, and spectrum of disease. Terms such as "camel exposure" and the epidemiological relationships of cases should be clearly defined and standardized. We strongly recommend a shared and accessible registry or database. Coronaviruses will likely continue to emerge, arguing for a unified "One Health" approach.

Viral detection profile in children with severe acute respiratory infection.

OBJECTIVES: The role of viral co-detection in children with severe acute respiratory infection is not clear. We described the viral detection profile and its association with clinical characteristics in children admitted to the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) during the 2009 influenza A(H1N1) pandemic. METHOD: Longitudinal observational retrospective study, with patients aged 0-18 years, admitted to 11 PICUs in Rio de Janeiro, with suspected H1N1 infection, from June to November, 2009. The results of respiratory samples which were sent to the Laboratory of Fiocruz/RJ and clinical data extracted from specific forms were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 71 samples, 38% tested positive for H1N1 virus. Of the 63 samples tested for other viruses, 58 were positive: influenza H1N1 (43.1% of positive samples), rhinovirus/enterovirus (41.4%), respiratory syncytial vírus (12.1%), human metapneumovirus (12.1%), adenovirus (6.9%), and bocavirus (3.5%). Viral codetection occured in 22.4% of the cases. H1N1-positive patients were of a higher median age, had higher frequency of fever, cough and tachypnea, and decreased leukometry when compared to H1N1-negative patients. There was no difference in relation to severity outcomes (number of organic dysfunctions, use of mechanical ventilation or amines, hospital/PICU length of stay or death). Comparing the groups with mono-detection and co-dection of any virus, no difference was found regarding the association with any clinical variable. CONCLUSIONS: Other viruses can be implicated in SARI in children. The role of viral codetection has not yet been completely elucidated.

Surveillance of Severe Acute Respiratory Infection (SARI) for Hospitalized Patients in Northern Vietnam, 2011-2014.

Severe acute respiratory infections (SARI) are leading causes of hospitalization, morbidity, and mortality in children worldwide. The aim of this study was to identify viral pathogens responsible for SARI in northern Vietnam in the period from 2011 to 2014. Throat swabs and tracheal aspirates were collected from SARI patients according to WHO guidelines. The presence of 13 different viral pathogens (influenza A[H1N1]pdm09; A/H3N2; A/H5; A/H7 and B; para influenza 1,2,3; RSV; HMPV; adeno; severe acute respiratory syndrome-CoV and rhino) was tested by conventional/real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction. During the study period, 975 samples were collected and tested. More than 30% (32.1%, 313 samples) of the samples showed evidence of infection with influenza viruses, including A/H3N2 (48 samples), A (H1N1) pdm09 (221 samples), influenza B (42 samples), and co-infection of A (H1N1) pdm09 or A/H3N2 and influenza B (2 samples). Other respiratory pathogens were detected in 101 samples, including rhinovirus (73 samples), adenovirus (10 samples), hMPV (9 samples), parainfluenza 3 (5 samples), parainfluenza 2 (3 samples), and RSV (1 sample). Influenza A/H5, A/H7, or SARS-CoV were not detected. Respiratory viral infection, particularly infection of influenza and rhinoviruses, were associated with high rates of SARI hospitalization, and future studies correlating the clinical aspects are needed to design interventions, including targeted vaccination.

Viral detection profile in children with severe acute respiratory infection

ABSTRACT Objectives: The role of viral co-detection in children with severe acute respiratory infection is not clear. We described the viral detection profile and its association with clinical characteristics in children admitted to the Pediatric Intensive Care Unit (PICU) during the 2009 influenza A(H1N1) pandemic. Method: Longitudinal observational retrospective study, with patients aged 0-18 years, admitted to 11 PICUs in Rio de Janeiro, with suspected H1N1 infection, from June to November, 2009. The results of respiratory samples which were sent to the Laboratory of Fiocruz/RJ and clinical data extracted from specific forms were analyzed. Results: Of 71 samples, 38% tested positive for H1N1 virus. Of the 63 samples tested for other viruses, 58 were positive: influenza H1N1 (43.1% of positive samples), rhinovirus/enterovirus (41.4%), respiratory syncytial vírus (12.1%), human metapneumovirus (12.1%), adenovirus (6.9%), and bocavirus (3.5%). Viral codetection occured in 22.4% of the cases. H1N1-positive patients were of a higher median age, had higher frequency of fever, cough and tachypnea, and decreased leukometry when compared to H1N1-negative patients. There was no difference in relation to severity outcomes (number of organic dysfunctions, use of mechanical ventilation or amines, hospital/PICU length of stay or death). Comparing the groups with mono-detection and co-dection of any virus, no difference was found regarding the association with any clinical variable. Conclusions: Other viruses can be implicated in SARI in children. The role of viral codetection has not yet been completely elucidated.

Infección respiratoria aguda grave en pacientes cubanos durante la ola de influenza pandémica A (H1N1) en Cuba, 2009 / Severe acute respiratory infection in Cuban patients during the influenza A (H1N1) pandemic in Cuba, 2009

INTRODUCCIÓN: en abril de 2009 las autoridades de salud de México reportan a la Organización Panamericana de la Salud un incremento de las hospitalizaciones por neumonía con tasas elevadas de mortalidad. El Sistema Nacional de Vigilancia Epidemiológica, notó que este incremento se presentaba fundamentalmente en las edades de 20 a 40 años. Se identificó un nuevo virus influenza A de origen porcino subtipo (H1N1) como agente causal de la primera pandemia del siglo XXI. El 26 de abril de 2009 el plan nacional de enfrentamiento a la pandemia por influenza (H1N1) es activado por las autoridades nacionales de salud de la República de Cuba y el 7 de mayo se diagnosticó el caso índice de influenza pandémica (H1N1) en Cuba. Se estableció un sistema de vigilancia integrada con confirmación de laboratorio. OBJETIVOS: detectar e identificar el virus de la influenza pandémica durante la ola pandémica. MÉTODOS: durante las semanas epidemiológicas de la 37 a la 41 se observó un alza en el número de atenciones médicas. En este período se seleccionaron para este análisis solo las muestras colectadas de pacientes con diagnóstico clínico de infección respiratoria aguda grave divididas en tres grupos fundamentales, 370 niños y adultos graves, 55 gestantes graves y 30 fallecidos. El diagnóstico fue realizado por reacción en cadena de la polimerasa en tiempo real para los virus de influenza pandémica y reacción en cadena de la polimerasa convencional para otros virus respiratorios. RESULTADOS: el virus de la influenza pandémica se detectó en 65, 20 y 9 casos, respectivamente. El virus de la influenza estacional A (H3N2) en 81 casos de infección respiratoria aguda grave, donde se incluyeron pacientes de todas las edades; 10 gestantes graves y en 5 fallecidos, los cuales fueron detectados por reacción en cadena de la polimerasa en tiempo real. Otros virus respiratorios también fueron monitoreados por reacción en cadena de la polimerasa a punto final. CONCLUSIONES: el análisis integr...(AU)

INTRODUCTION: on April 2009, the Mexican health authorities reported increased hospitalization indexes caused by pneumonia with high mortality rates to the Pan-American Health Organization (PAHO). The National Epidemiological Surveillance System of Mexico noticed that this increase mainly occurred in the 20-40 year old population. A new type of swine influenza A (H1N1) virus was identified by laboratory studies as the etiological agent of the first pandemic of the 21st century. On April 26 2009, the National Anti-pandemic Plan was activated by the Cuban Ministry of Public Health, and on May 7th, the lab-confirmed index case appeared. An integrated surveillance system with laboratory confirmation was set up. OBJECTIVES: to detect pandemic influenza virus during the pandemic wave. METHODS: the epidemiological weeks 37 to 41 witnessed a rise of the number of sick people seen by the medical services. In this period, the samples taken from patients clinically diagnosed with severe acute respiratory infection were selected for this analysis; they were divided into three groups, that is, 370 children and adults in critical condition, 55 pregnant women in severe condition and 30 fatal cases. The diagnosis of the pandemic virus was performed by Real Time Polymerase Chain Reaction Test (PCR). Other respiratory viruses were tested by conventional PCR. RESULTS: the pandemic influenza virus was detected in 65 children and adults, 20 pregnant women and 9 fatal cases. The seasonal influenza A (H3N2) virus was identified in 81 cases of severe acute respiratory infection covering all age groups, 10 pregnant women and 5 deceased on the basis of real time polymerase chain reaction test. Other respiratory viruses were also monitored by the end-point polymerase chain reaction. CONCLUSIONS: the comprehensive analysis of these results contributes to the national and regional surveillance of respiratory viruses for the improvement of the prevention and control programs of the acute ...(AU)

Infección respiratoria aguda grave en pacientes cubanos durante la ola de influenza pandémica A (H1N1) en Cuba, 2009 / Severe acute respiratory infection in Cuban patients during the influenza A (H1N1) pandemic in Cuba, 2009

INTRODUCCIÓN: en abril de 2009 las autoridades de salud de México reportan a la Organización Panamericana de la Salud un incremento de las hospitalizaciones por neumonía con tasas elevadas de mortalidad. El Sistema Nacional de Vigilancia Epidemiológica, notó que este incremento se presentaba fundamentalmente en las edades de 20 a 40 años. Se identificó un nuevo virus influenza A de origen porcino subtipo (H1N1) como agente causal de la primera pandemia del siglo XXI. El 26 de abril de 2009 el plan nacional de enfrentamiento a la pandemia por influenza (H1N1) es activado por las autoridades nacionales de salud de la República de Cuba y el 7 de mayo se diagnosticó el caso índice de influenza pandémica (H1N1) en Cuba. Se estableció un sistema de vigilancia integrada con confirmación de laboratorio. OBJETIVOS: detectar e identificar el virus de la influenza pandémica durante la ola pandémica. MÉTODOS: durante las semanas epidemiológicas de la 37 a la 41 se observó un alza en el número de atenciones médicas. En este período se seleccionaron para este análisis solo las muestras colectadas de pacientes con diagnóstico clínico de infección respiratoria aguda grave divididas en tres grupos fundamentales, 370 niños y adultos graves, 55 gestantes graves y 30 fallecidos. El diagnóstico fue realizado por reacción en cadena de la polimerasa en tiempo real para los virus de influenza pandémica y reacción en cadena de la polimerasa convencional para otros virus respiratorios. RESULTADOS: el virus de la influenza pandémica se detectó en 65, 20 y 9 casos, respectivamente. El virus de la influenza estacional A (H3N2) en 81 casos de infección respiratoria aguda grave, donde se incluyeron pacientes de todas las edades; 10 gestantes graves y en 5 fallecidos, los cuales fueron detectados por reacción en cadena de la polimerasa en tiempo real. Otros virus respiratorios también fueron monitoreados por reacción en cadena de la polimerasa a punto final. CONCLUSIONES: el análisis integral de estos resultados constituye un aporte a la vigilancia nacional y regional de los virus respiratorios para el perfeccionamiento de los programas de prevención y control de las infecciones respiratorias agudas.

INTRODUCTION: on April 2009, the Mexican health authorities reported increased hospitalization indexes caused by pneumonia with high mortality rates to the Pan-American Health Organization (PAHO). The National Epidemiological Surveillance System of Mexico noticed that this increase mainly occurred in the 20-40 year old population. A new type of swine influenza A (H1N1) virus was identified by laboratory studies as the etiological agent of the first pandemic of the 21st century. On April 26 2009, the National Anti-pandemic Plan was activated by the Cuban Ministry of Public Health, and on May 7th, the lab-confirmed index case appeared. An integrated surveillance system with laboratory confirmation was set up. OBJECTIVES: to detect pandemic influenza virus during the pandemic wave. METHODS: the epidemiological weeks 37 to 41 witnessed a rise of the number of sick people seen by the medical services. In this period, the samples taken from patients clinically diagnosed with severe acute respiratory infection were selected for this analysis; they were divided into three groups, that is, 370 children and adults in critical condition, 55 pregnant women in severe condition and 30 fatal cases. The diagnosis of the pandemic virus was performed by Real Time Polymerase Chain Reaction Test (PCR). Other respiratory viruses were tested by conventional PCR. RESULTS: the pandemic influenza virus was detected in 65 children and adults, 20 pregnant women and 9 fatal cases. The seasonal influenza A (H3N2) virus was identified in 81 cases of severe acute respiratory infection covering all age groups, 10 pregnant women and 5 deceased on the basis of real time polymerase chain reaction test. Other respiratory viruses were also monitored by the end-point polymerase chain reaction. CONCLUSIONS: the comprehensive analysis of these results contributes to the national and regional surveillance of respiratory viruses for the improvement of the prevention and control programs of the acute respiratory infections.

Clinical management of severe acute respiratory infection when novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) infection is suspected: Interim guidance

This document is intended for clinicians taking care of hospitalised adult and paediatric patients with severe acute respiratory infection (SARI) when a nCoV infection is suspected. It is not meant to replace clinical judgment or specialist consultation but rather to strengthen clinical management of these patients and provide to up-to-date guidance. Best practices for SARI including IPC and optimized supportive care for severely ill patients are essential.