25 research outputs found

    Estimating age-stratified influenza-associated invasive pneumococcal disease in England: A time-series model based on population surveillance data.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Measures of the contribution of influenza to Streptococcus pneumoniae infections, both in the seasonal and pandemic setting, are needed to predict the burden of secondary bacterial infections in future pandemics to inform stockpiling. The magnitude of the interaction between these two pathogens has been difficult to quantify because both infections are mainly clinically diagnosed based on signs and symptoms; a combined viral-bacterial testing is rarely performed in routine clinical practice; and surveillance data suffer from confounding problems common to all ecological studies. We proposed a novel multivariate model for age-stratified disease incidence, incorporating contact patterns and estimating disease transmission within and across groups. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used surveillance data from England over the years 2009 to 2017. Influenza infections were identified through the virological testing of samples taken from patients diagnosed with influenza-like illness (ILI) within the sentinel scheme run by the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP). Invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) cases were routinely reported to Public Health England (PHE) by all the microbiology laboratories included in the national surveillance system. IPD counts at week t, conditional on the previous time point t-1, were assumed to be negative binomially distributed. Influenza counts were linearly included in the model for the mean IPD counts along with an endemic component describing some seasonal background and an autoregressive component mimicking pneumococcal transmission. Using age-specific counts, Akaike information criterion (AIC)-based model selection suggested that the best fit was obtained when the endemic component was expressed as a function of observed temperature and rainfall. Pneumococcal transmission within the same age group was estimated to explain 33.0% (confidence interval [CI] 24.9%-39.9%) of new cases in the elderly, whereas 50.7% (CI 38.8%-63.2%) of incidence in adults aged 15-44 years was attributed to transmission from another age group. The contribution of influenza on IPD during the 2009 pandemic also appeared to vary greatly across subgroups, being highest in school-age children and adults (18.3%, CI 9.4%-28.2%, and 6.07%, CI 2.83%-9.76%, respectively). Other viral infections, such as respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and rhinovirus, also seemed to have an impact on IPD: RSV contributed 1.87% (CI 0.89%-3.08%) to pneumococcal infections in the 65+ group, whereas 2.14% (CI 0.87%-3.57%) of cases in the group of 45- to 64-year-olds were attributed to rhinovirus. The validity of this modelling strategy relies on the assumption that viral surveillance adequately represents the true incidence of influenza in the population, whereas the small numbers of IPD cases observed in the younger age groups led to significant uncertainty around some parameter estimates. CONCLUSIONS: Our estimates suggested that a pandemic wave of influenza A/H1N1 with comparable severity to the 2009 pandemic could have a modest impact on school-age children and adults in terms of IPD and a small to negligible impact on infants and the elderly. The seasonal impact of other viruses such as RSV and rhinovirus was instead more important in the older population groups

    Comparative transmission of SARS-CoV-2 Omicron (B.1.1.529) and Delta (B.1.617.2) variants and the impact of vaccination: national cohort study, England

    Get PDF
    The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Omicron variant (B.1.1.529) rapidly replaced Delta (B.1.617.2) to become dominant in England. Our study assessed differences in transmission between Omicron and Delta using two independent data sources and methods. Omicron and Delta cases were identified through genomic sequencing, genotyping and S-gene target failure in England from 5-11 December 2021. Secondary attack rates for named contacts were calculated in household and non-household settings using contact tracing data, while household clustering was identified using national surveillance data. Logistic regression models were applied to control for factors associated with transmission for both methods. For contact tracing data, higher secondary attack rates for Omicron vs. Delta were identified in households (15.0% vs. 10.8%) and non-households (8.2% vs. 3.7%). For both variants, in household settings, onward transmission was reduced from cases and named contacts who had three doses of vaccine compared to two, but this effect was less pronounced for Omicron (adjusted risk ratio, aRR 0.78 and 0.88) than Delta (aRR 0.62 and 0.68). In non-household settings, a similar reduction was observed only in contacts who had three doses vs. two doses for both Delta (aRR 0.51) and Omicron (aRR 0.76). For national surveillance data, the risk of household clustering, was increased 3.5-fold for Omicron compared to Delta (aRR 3.54 (3.29-3.81)). Our study identified increased risk of onward transmission of Omicron, consistent with its successful global displacement of Delta. We identified a reduced effectiveness of vaccination in lowering risk of transmission, a likely contributor for the rapid propagation of Omicron

    Transmission dynamics of COVID-19 in household and community settings in the United Kingdom

    Get PDF
    AbstractBackgroundHouseholds appear to be the highest risk setting for transmission of COVID-19. Large household transmission studies were reported in the early stages of the pandemic in Asia with secondary attack rates ranging from 5–30% but few large scale household transmission studies have been conducted outside of Asia.MethodsA prospective case ascertained study design based on the World Health Organization FFX protocol was undertaken in the UK following the detection of the first case in late January 2020. Household contacts of cases were followed using enhanced surveillance forms to establish whether they developed symptoms of COVID-19, became confirmed cases and their outcomes. Household secondary attack rates and serial intervals were estimated. Individual and household basic reproduction numbers were also estimated. The incubation period was estimated using known point source exposures that resulted in secondary cases.ResultsA total of 233 households with two or more people were included with a total of 472 contacts. The overall household SAR was 37% (95% CI 31–43%) with a mean serial interval of 4.67 days, an R0 of 1.85 and a household reproduction number of 2.33. We find lower secondary attack rates in larger households. SARs were highest when the primary case was a child. We estimate a mean incubation period of around 4.5 days.ConclusionsHigh rates of household transmission of COVID-19 were found in the UK emphasising the need for preventative measures in this setting. Careful monitoring of schools reopening is needed to monitor transmission from children.</jats:sec

    Hospital admission and emergency care attendance risk for SARS-CoV-2 delta (B.1.617.2) compared with alpha (B.1.1.7) variants of concern: a cohort study

    Get PDF
    Background: The SARS-CoV-2 delta (B.1.617.2) variant was first detected in England in March, 2021. It has since rapidly become the predominant lineage, owing to high transmissibility. It is suspected that the delta variant is associated with more severe disease than the previously dominant alpha (B.1.1.7) variant. We aimed to characterise the severity of the delta variant compared with the alpha variant by determining the relative risk of hospital attendance outcomes. Methods: This cohort study was done among all patients with COVID-19 in England between March 29 and May 23, 2021, who were identified as being infected with either the alpha or delta SARS-CoV-2 variant through whole-genome sequencing. Individual-level data on these patients were linked to routine health-care datasets on vaccination, emergency care attendance, hospital admission, and mortality (data from Public Health England's Second Generation Surveillance System and COVID-19-associated deaths dataset; the National Immunisation Management System; and NHS Digital Secondary Uses Services and Emergency Care Data Set). The risk for hospital admission and emergency care attendance were compared between patients with sequencing-confirmed delta and alpha variants for the whole cohort and by vaccination status subgroups. Stratified Cox regression was used to adjust for age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation, recent international travel, area of residence, calendar week, and vaccination status. Findings: Individual-level data on 43 338 COVID-19-positive patients (8682 with the delta variant, 34 656 with the alpha variant; median age 31 years IQR 17–43) were included in our analysis. 196 (2·3%) patients with the delta variant versus 764 (2·2%) patients with the alpha variant were admitted to hospital within 14 days after the specimen was taken (adjusted hazard ratio HR 2·26 95% CI 1·32–3·89). 498 (5·7%) patients with the delta variant versus 1448 (4·2%) patients with the alpha variant were admitted to hospital or attended emergency care within 14 days (adjusted HR 1·45 1·08–1·95). Most patients were unvaccinated (32 078 74·0% across both groups). The HRs for vaccinated patients with the delta variant versus the alpha variant (adjusted HR for hospital admission 1·94 95% CI 0·47–8·05 and for hospital admission or emergency care attendance 1·58 0·69–3·61) were similar to the HRs for unvaccinated patients (2·32 1·29–4·16 and 1·43 1·04–1·97; p=0·82 for both) but the precision for the vaccinated subgroup was low. Interpretation: This large national study found a higher hospital admission or emergency care attendance risk for patients with COVID-19 infected with the delta variant compared with the alpha variant. Results suggest that outbreaks of the delta variant in unvaccinated populations might lead to a greater burden on health-care services than the alpha variant

    ICAR: endoscopic skull‐base surgery

    Get PDF
    n/

    Hospital admission and emergency care attendance risk for SARS-CoV-2 delta (B.1.617.2) compared with alpha (B.1.1.7) variants of concern: a cohort study

    Get PDF
    Background: The SARS-CoV-2 delta (B.1.617.2) variant was first detected in England in March, 2021. It has since rapidly become the predominant lineage, owing to high transmissibility. It is suspected that the delta variant is associated with more severe disease than the previously dominant alpha (B.1.1.7) variant. We aimed to characterise the severity of the delta variant compared with the alpha variant by determining the relative risk of hospital attendance outcomes. Methods: This cohort study was done among all patients with COVID-19 in England between March 29 and May 23, 2021, who were identified as being infected with either the alpha or delta SARS-CoV-2 variant through whole-genome sequencing. Individual-level data on these patients were linked to routine health-care datasets on vaccination, emergency care attendance, hospital admission, and mortality (data from Public Health England's Second Generation Surveillance System and COVID-19-associated deaths dataset; the National Immunisation Management System; and NHS Digital Secondary Uses Services and Emergency Care Data Set). The risk for hospital admission and emergency care attendance were compared between patients with sequencing-confirmed delta and alpha variants for the whole cohort and by vaccination status subgroups. Stratified Cox regression was used to adjust for age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation, recent international travel, area of residence, calendar week, and vaccination status. Findings: Individual-level data on 43 338 COVID-19-positive patients (8682 with the delta variant, 34 656 with the alpha variant; median age 31 years [IQR 17–43]) were included in our analysis. 196 (2·3%) patients with the delta variant versus 764 (2·2%) patients with the alpha variant were admitted to hospital within 14 days after the specimen was taken (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 2·26 [95% CI 1·32–3·89]). 498 (5·7%) patients with the delta variant versus 1448 (4·2%) patients with the alpha variant were admitted to hospital or attended emergency care within 14 days (adjusted HR 1·45 [1·08–1·95]). Most patients were unvaccinated (32 078 [74·0%] across both groups). The HRs for vaccinated patients with the delta variant versus the alpha variant (adjusted HR for hospital admission 1·94 [95% CI 0·47–8·05] and for hospital admission or emergency care attendance 1·58 [0·69–3·61]) were similar to the HRs for unvaccinated patients (2·32 [1·29–4·16] and 1·43 [1·04–1·97]; p=0·82 for both) but the precision for the vaccinated subgroup was low. Interpretation: This large national study found a higher hospital admission or emergency care attendance risk for patients with COVID-19 infected with the delta variant compared with the alpha variant. Results suggest that outbreaks of the delta variant in unvaccinated populations might lead to a greater burden on health-care services than the alpha variant. Funding: Medical Research Council; UK Research and Innovation; Department of Health and Social Care; and National Institute for Health Research

    Your First Ent Job: A Survivor's Guide

    No full text

    Forecasting the 2017/2018 seasonal influenza epidemic in England using multiple dynamic transmission models: a case study.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Since the 2009 A/H1N1 pandemic, Public Health England have developed a suite of real-time statistical models utilising enhanced pandemic surveillance data to nowcast and forecast a future pandemic. Their ability to track seasonal influenza and predict heightened winter healthcare burden in the light of high activity in Australia in 2017 was untested. METHODS: Four transmission models were used in forecasting the 2017/2018 seasonal influenza epidemic in England: a stratified primary care model using daily, region-specific, counts and virological swab positivity of influenza-like illness consultations in general practice (GP); a strain-specific (SS) model using weekly, national GP ILI and virological data; an intensive care model (ICU) using reports of ICU influenza admissions; and a synthesis model that included all data sources. For the first 12 weeks of 2018, each model was applied to the latest data to provide estimates of epidemic parameters and short-term influenza forecasts. The added value of pre-season population susceptibility data was explored. RESULTS: The combined results provided valuable nowcasts of the state of the epidemic. Short-term predictions of burden on primary and secondary health services were initially highly variable before reaching consensus beyond the observed peaks in activity between weeks 3-4 of 2018. Estimates for R0 were consistent over time for three of the four models until week 12 of 2018, and there was consistency in the estimation of R0 across the SPC and SS models, and in the ICU attack rates estimated by the ICU and the synthesis model. Estimation and predictions varied according to the assumed levels of pre-season immunity. CONCLUSIONS: This exercise successfully applied a range of pandemic models to seasonal influenza. Forecasting early in the season remains challenging but represents a crucially important activity to inform planning. Improved knowledge of pre-existing levels of immunity would be valuable
    corecore