Acceptance and feasibility of school-based seasonal influenza vaccination in Singapore: A qualitative study.

INTRODUCTION: Influenza is a major cause of disease in children. School-based seasonal influenza vaccination can be a cost-effective tool to improve vaccine uptake among children, and can bring substantial health and economic benefits to the broader community. The acceptance and feasibility of school-based influenza vaccination are likely to be highly context-specific, but limited data exist from tropical settings with year-round influenza transmission. We conducted a qualitative study to assess acceptability and feasibility of a school-based seasonal influenza vaccination programme in Singapore. METHODS: We conducted qualitative in-depth interviews with key stakeholders, including healthcare professionals, representatives of relevant ministries, preschool principals and parents to understand their perspectives on a proposed school-based seasonal influenza vaccination programme. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: We conducted 40 interviews. Although preschool-aged children are currently the recommended age group for vaccination, stakeholders suggested introducing the programme in primary and/or secondary schools, where existing vaccination infrastructure would facilitate delivery. However, more comprehensive evidence on the local influenza burden and transmission patterns among children is required to develop an evidence-based, locally relevant rationale for a school-based vaccination programme and effectively engage policy-makers, school staff, and parents. Extensive, age-appropriate public education and awareness campaigns would increase the acceptability of the programme among stakeholders. Stakeholders indicated that an opt-out programme with free or subsidised vaccination would be the most likely to achieve high vaccine coverage and make access to vaccination more equitable. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, participants were supportive of a free or subsidised school-based influenza vaccination programme in primary and/or secondary schools, although children in this age group are not currently a recommended group for vaccination. However, a better informed, evidence-based rationale to estimate the programme's impact in Singapore is currently lacking. Extensive, age-appropriate public education and awareness campaigns will help ensure full support across key stakeholder groups

Effectiveness of Masks and Respirators Against Respiratory Infections in Healthcare Workers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

This systematic review and meta-analysis quantified the protective effect of facemasks and respirators against respiratory infections among healthcare workers. Relevant articles were retrieved from Pubmed, EMBASE, and Web of Science. Meta-analyses were conducted to calculate pooled estimates. Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) indicated a protective effect of masks and respirators against clinical respiratory illness (CRI) (risk ratio [RR] = 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.46-0.77) and influenza-like illness (ILI) (RR = 0.34; 95% CI:0.14-0.82). Compared to masks, N95 respirators conferred superior protection against CRI (RR = 0.47; 95% CI: 0.36-0.62) and laboratory-confirmed bacterial (RR = 0.46; 95% CI: 0.34-0.62), but not viral infections or ILI. Meta-analysis of observational studies provided evidence of a protective effect of masks (OR = 0.13; 95% CI: 0.03-0.62) and respirators (OR = 0.12; 95% CI: 0.06-0.26) against severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). This systematic review and meta-analysis supports the use of respiratory protection. However, the existing evidence is sparse and findings are inconsistent within and across studies. Multicentre RCTs with standardized protocols conducted outside epidemic periods would help to clarify the circumstances under which the use of masks or respirators is most warranted

Multinational Outbreak of Listeria monocytogenes Infections Linked to Enoki Mushrooms Imported from the Republic of Korea 2016–2020

Keeping the global food supply safe necessitates international collaborations between countries. Health and regulatory agencies routinely communicate during foodborne illness outbreaks, allowing partners to share investigational evidence. A 2016–2020 outbreak of Listeria monocytogenes infections linked to imported enoki mushrooms required a multinational collaborative investigation among the United States, Canada, Australia, and France. Ultimately, this outbreak included 48 ill people, 36 in the United States and 12 in Canada, and was linked to enoki mushrooms sourced from one manufacturer located in the Republic of Korea. Epidemiologic, laboratory, and traceback evidence led to multiple regulatory actions, including extensive voluntary recalls by three firms in the United States and one firm in Canada. In the United States and Canada, the Korean manufacturer was placed on import alert while other international partners provided information about their respective investigations and advised the public not to eat the recalled enoki mushrooms. The breadth of the geographic distribution of this outbreak emphasizes the global reach of the food industry. This investigation provides a powerful example of the impact of national and international coordination of efforts to respond to foodborne illness outbreaks and protect consumers. It also demonstrates the importance of fast international data sharing and collaboration in identifying and stopping foodborne outbreaks in the global community. Additionally, it is a meaningful example of the importance of food sampling, testing, and integration of sequencing results into surveillance databases