Introduction of SARS in France, March–April, 2003

We describe severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in France. Patients meeting the World Health Organization definition of a suspected case underwent a clinical, radiologic, and biologic assessment at the closest university-affiliated infectious disease ward. Suspected cases were immediately reported to the Institut de Veille Sanitaire. Probable case-patients were isolated, their contacts quarantined at home, and were followed for 10 days after exposure. Five probable cases occurred from March through April 2003; four were confirmed as SARS coronavirus by reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction, serologic testing, or both. The index case-patient (patient A), who had worked in the French hospital of Hanoi, Vietnam, was the most probable source of transmission for the three other confirmed cases; two had been exposed to patient A while on the Hanoi-Paris flight of March 22–23. Timely detection, isolation of probable cases, and quarantine of their contacts appear to have been effective in preventing the secondary spread of SARS in France

Immunisation of migrants in EU/EEA countries: Policies and practices

In recent years various EU/EEA countries have experienced an influx of migrants from low and middle-income countries. In 2018, the “Vaccine European New Integrated Collaboration Effort (VENICE)” survey group conducted a survey among 30 EU/EEA countries to investigate immunisation policies and practices targeting irregular migrants, refugees and asylum seekers (later called “migrants” in this report). Twenty-nine countries participated in the survey. Twenty-eight countries reported having national policies targeting children/adolescent and adult migrants, however vaccinations offered to adult migrants are limited to specific conditions in seven countries. All the vaccinations included in the National Immunisation Programme (NIP) are offered to children/adolescents in 27/28 countries and to adults in 13/28 countries. In the 15 countries offering only certain vaccinations to adults, priority is given to diphtheria-tetanus, measles-mumps-rubella and polio vaccinations. Information about the vaccines given to child/adolescent migrants is recorded in 22 countries and to adult migrants in 19 countries with a large variation in recording methods found across countries. Individual and aggregated data are reportedly not shared with other centres/institutions in 13 and 15 countries, respectively. Twenty countries reported not collecting data on vaccination uptake among migrants; only three countries have these data at the national level. Procedures to guarantee migrants’ access to vaccinations at the community level are available in 13 countries. In conclusion, although diversified, strategies for migrant vaccination are in place in all countries except for one, and the strategies are generally in line with international recommendations. Efforts are needed to strengthen partnerships and implement initiatives across countries of origin, transit and destination to develop and better share documentation in order to guarantee a completion of vaccination series and to avoid unnecessary re-vaccination. Development of migrant-friendly strategies to facilitate migrants' access to vaccination and collection of vaccination uptake data among migrants is needed to meet existing gaps

Immunisation of migrants in EWEEA countries: Policies and practices

In recent years various EU/EEA countries have experienced an influx of migrants from low and middle income countries. In 2018, the “Vaccine European New Integrated Collaboration Effort (VENICE)” survey group conducted a survey among 30 EU/EEA countries to investigate immunisation policies and practices targeting irregular migrants, refugees and asylum seekers (later called “migrants” in this report). Twenty-nine countries participated in the survey. Twenty-eight countries reported having national policies targeting children/adolescent and adult migrants, however vaccinations offered to adult migrants are limited to specific conditions in seven countries. All the vaccinations included in the National Immunisation Programme (NIP) are offered to children/adolescents in 27/28 countries and to adults in 13/28 countries. In the 15 countries offering only certain vaccinations to adults, priority is given to diphtheria-tetanus, measles-mumps-rubella and polio vaccinations. Information about the vaccines given to child/adolescent migrants is recorded in 22 countries and to adult migrants in 19 countries with a large variation in recording methods found across countries. Individual and aggregated data are reportedly not shared with other centres/institutions in 13 and 15 countries, respectively. Twenty countries reported not collecting data on vaccination uptake among migrants; only three countries have these data at the national level. Procedures to guarantee migrants’ access to vaccinations at the community level are available in 13 countries. In conclusion, although diversified, strategies for migrant vaccination are in place in all countries except for one, and the strategies are generally in line with international recommendations. Efforts are needed to strengthen partnerships and implement initiatives across countries of origin, transit and destination to develop and better share documentation in order to guarantee a completion of vaccination series and to avoid unnecessary re-vaccination. Development of migrant-friendly strategies to facilitate migrants’ access to vaccination and collection of vaccination uptake data among migrants is needed to meet existing gaps. (C) 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd