Use of neuraminidase inhibitors in primary health care during pandemic and seasonal influenza between 2009 and 2013: Outpatient influenza antiviral treatment

International audienceBACKGROUND:In a context of controversy about influenza antiviral treatments, this study assessed primary health-care physicians' prescription of neuraminidase inhibitors (NIs) in France during pandemic and seasonal influenza between 2009 and 2013.METHODS:This observational study, using data recorded in three national databases, estimated the rate of NI prescription among influenza-like illness (ILI) patients seen in GP and paediatrician consultations, and determined factors associated with this prescription according to a multivariate analysis. NI delivery by pharmacists was also evaluated.RESULTS:Rates of NI prescription were estimated to be 61.1% among ILI patients with a severe influenza risk factor seen in GP consultation during the A(H1N1)pdm2009 pandemic versus an average rate of 25.9% during the three following seasonal influenza epidemics. Factors associated with NI prescription were a chronic disease in patients under 65 years (OR 14.85; 95% CI 13.00, 16.97) and in those aged 65 and older (OR 7.54; 5.86, 9.70), an age ≥65 years in patients without chronic disease (OR 1.35; 1.04, 1.74), a pregnancy (OR 10.63; 7.67, 15.76), obesity (OR 4.67; 3.50, 6.22) and a consultation during the pandemic A(H1N1)pdm2009 (OR 3.19; 2.93, 3.48). The number of antiviral treatments delivered by pharmacists during the A(H1N1)pdm2009 pandemic was 835 per 100,000 inhabitants, and an average of 275 per 100,000 inhabitants during the three following seasonal influenza epidemics.CONCLUSIONS:Although physicians seem to follow the recommended indications for NIs in primary health-care practice, this study confirms the low rate of NI prescription to ILI patients with a severe influenza risk factor, especially during seasonal epidemics

Acute diarrhea in adults consulting a general practitioner in France during winter: incidence, clinical characteristics, management and risk factors

International audienceBackgroundData describing the epidemiology and management of viral acute diarrhea (AD) in adults are scant. The objective of this study was to identify the incidence, clinical characteristics, management and risk factors of winter viral AD in adults.MethodsThe incidence of AD in adults during two consecutive winters (from December 2010 to April 2011 and from December 2011 to April 2012) was estimated from the French Sentinelles network. During these two winters, a subset of Sentinelles general practitioners (GPs) identified and included adult patients who presented with AD and who filled out a questionnaire and returned a stool specimen for virological examination. All stool specimens were tested for astrovirus, group A rotavirus, human enteric adenovirus, and norovirus of genogroup I and genogroup II. Age- and sex-matched controls were included to permit a case¿control analysis with the aim of identifying risk factors for viral AD.ResultsDuring the studied winters, the average incidence of AD in adults was estimated to be 3,158 per 100,000 French adults (95% CI [2,321 ¿ 3,997]). The most reported clinical signs were abdominal pain (91.1%), watery diarrhea (88.5%), and nausea (83.3%). GPs prescribed a treatment in 95% of the patients with AD, and 80% of the working patients with AD could not go to work. Stool examinations were positive for at least one enteric virus in 65% (95% CI [57 ¿ 73]) of patients with AD with a predominance of noroviruses (49%). Having been in contact with a person who has suffered from AD in the last 7 days, whether within or outside the household, and having a job (or being a student) were risk factors significantly associated with acquiring viral AD.ConclusionsDuring the winter, AD of viral origin is a frequent disease in adults, and noroviruses are most often the cause. No preventable risk factor was identified other than contact with a person with AD. Thus, at the present time, reinforcement of education related to hand hygiene remains the only way to reduce the burden of disease

Efficacy of Oseltamivir-Zanamivir Combination Compared to Each Monotherapy for Seasonal Influenza: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial

Analysis of virological and clinical outcomes from a randomized trial that was terminated early suggest that combined treatment of seasonal influenza in adult outpatients with oseltamivir plus zanamivir is no more effective than either oseltamivir or zanamivir monotherapy

Surgical Mask to Prevent Influenza Transmission in Households: A Cluster Randomized Trial

Facemasks and respirators have been stockpiled during pandemic preparedness. However, data on their effectiveness for limiting transmission are scarce. We evaluated the effectiveness of facemask use by index cases for limiting influenza transmission by large droplets produced during coughing in households.A cluster randomized intervention trial was conducted in France during the 2008-2009 influenza season. Households were recruited during a medical visit of a household member with a positive rapid influenza A test and symptoms lasting less than 48 hours. Households were randomized either to the mask or control group for 7 days. In the intervention arm, the index case had to wear a surgical mask from the medical visit and for a period of 5 days. The trial was initially intended to include 372 households but was prematurely interrupted after the inclusion of 105 households (306 contacts) following the advice of an independent steering committee. We used generalized estimating equations to test the association between the intervention and the proportion of household contacts who developed an influenza-like illness during the 7 days following the inclusion. Influenza-like illness was reported in 24/148 (16.2%) of the contacts in the intervention arm and in 25/158 (15.8%) of the contacts in the control arm and the difference between arms was 0.40% (95%CI: -10% to 11%, P = 1.00). We observed a good adherence to the intervention. In various sensitivity analyses, we did not identify any trend in the results suggesting effectiveness of facemasks.This study should be interpreted with caution since the lack of statistical power prevents us to draw formal conclusion regarding effectiveness of facemasks in the context of a seasonal epidemic.clinicaltrials.gov NCT00774774

A survey of primary care physician practices in antibiotic prescribing for the treatment of uncomplicated male gonoccocal urethritis

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The development of resistance to antimicrobial therapy by <it>Neisseria gonorrhoeae </it>causes on-going problems for individual case management of gonorrhoea. Surveillance data about <it>N. gonorrhoeae </it>have indicated an increase in the incidence of gonorrhoea in France in 2006. As a consequence of the development of antibiotic resistance in <it>N. gonorrhoeae</it>, French guidelines excluded fluoroquinolones as a standard treatment for <it>N. gonorrhoeae</it>. Ceftriaxone became the recommended treatment, associated with azithromycin for <it>Clamydia trachomatis </it>infection. Our aim was to describe the practice patterns of general practitioners (GPs) in managing the antibiotic treatment of patients with symptoms suggestive of uncomplicated male urethritis.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We developed a clinical vignette describing a man with typical gonococcal urethritis symptoms to elicit questions about antibiotic treatment. We mailed the electronic questionnaire to a random sample of 1000 French GPs belonging to the <it>Sentinelles </it>Network.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>By the end of the survey period, 350 vignettes were received, yielding a response rate of 35%. Sixty-six GPs (20.2%) prescribed the recommended antibiotics for the simultaneous treatment of <it>N</it>. <it>gonorrhoeae </it>and <it>C. trachomatis </it>infections, while 132 GPs (40.4%) prescribed only non-recommended antibiotics, including ciprofloxacin in 69 cases (21.1%). General practitioners with less than 10 years in practice showed better compliance to guidelines than those with more years in practice (p < 0.05).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The results suggest a mismatch between the guidelines and the antibiotic treatment of male uncomplicated urethritis by French GPs, mostly among the subgroup of physicians who have been in practice longer. Educational approaches based on practice feedback need to be developed to improve these deficits in the quality of care.</p

Genetic Structure of Human A/H1N1 and A/H3N2 Influenza Virus on Corsica Island: Phylogenetic Analysis and Vaccine Strain Match, 2006–2010

Background: The aim of this study was to analyse the genetic patterns of Hemagglutinin (HA) genes of influenza A strains circulating on Corsica Island during the 2006-2009 epidemic seasons and the 2009-2010 pandemic season. [br/] Methods: Nasopharyngeal samples from 371 patients with influenza-like illness (ILI) were collected by General Practitioners (GPs) of the Sentinelles Network through a randomised selection routine. [br/] Results: Phylogenetic analysis of HA revealed that A/H3N2 strains circulating on Corsica were closely related to the WHO recommended vaccine strains in each analyzed season (2006-2007 to 2008-2009). Seasonal Corsican influenza A/H1N1 isolated during the 2007-2008 season had drifted towards the A/Brisbane/59/2007 lineage, the A/H1N1 vaccine strain for the 2008-2009 season. The A/H1N1 2009 (A/H1N1pdm) strains isolated on Corsica Island were characterized by the S220T mutation specific to clade 7 isolates. It should be noted that Corsican isolates formed a separate sub-clade of clade 7 as a consequence of the presence of the fixed substitution D222E. The percentages of the perfect match vaccine efficacy, estimated by using the p(epitope) model, against influenza viruses circulating on Corsica Island varied substantially across the four seasons analyzed, and tend to be highest for A/H1N1 compared with A/H3N2 vaccines, suggesting that cross-immunity seems to be stronger for the H1 HA gene. [br/] Conclusion: The molecular analysis of the HA gene of influenza viruses that circulated on Corsica Island between 2006-2010 showed for each season the presence of a dominant lineage characterized by at least one fixed mutation. The A/H3N2 and A/H1N1pdm isolates were characterized by multiples fixation at antigenic sites. The fixation of specific mutations at each outbreak could be explained by the combination of a neutral phenomenon and a founder effect, favoring the presence of a dominant lineage in a closed environment such as Corsica Island

Vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in adults aged 65 years and older in primary care: I-MOVE-COVID-19 project, Europe, December 2020 to May 2021

I-MOVE-COVID-19 primary care study team (in addition to authors above): Nick Andrews, Jamie Lopez Bernal, Heather Whitaker, Caroline Guerrisi, Titouan Launay, Shirley Masse, Sylvie van der Werf, Vincent Enouf, John Cuddihy, Adele McKenna, Michael Joyce, Cillian de Gascun, Joanne Moran, Ana Miqueleiz, Ana Navascués, Camino Trobajo-Sanmartín, Carmen Ezpeleta, Paula López Moreno, Javier Gorricho, Eva Ardanaz, Fernando Baigorria, Aurelio Barricarte, Enrique de la Cruz, Nerea Egüés, Manuel García Cenoz, Marcela Guevara, Conchi Moreno-Iribas, Carmen Sayón, Verónica Gomez, Baltazar Nunes, Rita Roquete, Adriana Silva, Aryse Melo, Inês Costa, Nuno Verdasca, Patrícia Conde, Diogo FP Marques, Anna Molesworth, Leanne Quinn, Miranda Leyton, Selin Campbell, Janine Thoulass, Jim McMenamin, Ana Martínez Mateo, Luca Basile, Daniel Castrillejo, Carmen Quiñones Rubio, Concepción Delgado-Sanz, Jesús Oliva.The I-MOVE-COVID-19 network collates epidemiological and clinical information on patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19), including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virological characterisation in 11 European countries [1]. One component of I-MOVE-COVID-19 is the multicentre vaccine effectiveness (VE) study at primary care/outpatient level in nine European study sites in eight countries. We measured overall and product-specific COVID-19 VE against symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection among those aged 65 years and older. We also measured VE by time since vaccination.This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101003673.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Field Effectiveness of Pandemic and 2009-2010 Seasonal Vaccines against 2009-2010 A(H1N1) Influenza: Estimations from Surveillance Data in France

BACKGROUND: In this study, we assess how effective pandemic and trivalent 2009-2010 seasonal vaccines were in preventing influenza-like illness (ILI) during the 2009 A(H1N1) pandemic in France. We also compare vaccine effectiveness against ILI versus laboratory-confirmed pandemic A(H1N1) influenza, and assess the possible bias caused by using non-specific endpoints and observational data. METHODOLOGY AND PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We estimated vaccine effectiveness by using the following formula: VE  =  (PPV-PCV)/(PPV(1-PCV)) × 100%, where PPV is the proportion vaccinated in the population and PCV the proportion of vaccinated influenza cases. People were considered vaccinated three weeks after receiving a dose of vaccine. ILI and pandemic A(H1N1) laboratory-confirmed cases were obtained from two surveillance networks of general practitioners. During the epidemic, 99.7% of influenza isolates were pandemic A(H1N1). Pandemic and seasonal vaccine uptakes in the population were obtained from the National Health Insurance database and by telephonic surveys, respectively. Effectiveness estimates were adjusted by age and week. The presence of residual biases was explored by calculating vaccine effectiveness after the influenza period. The effectiveness of pandemic vaccines in preventing ILI was 52% (95% confidence interval: 30-69) during the pandemic and 33% (4-55) after. It was 86% (56-98) against confirmed influenza. The effectiveness of seasonal vaccines against ILI was 61% (56-66) during the pandemic and 19% (-10-41) after. It was 60% (41-74) against confirmed influenza. CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness of pandemic vaccines in preventing confirmed pandemic A(H1N1) influenza on the field was high, consistently with published findings. It was significantly lower against ILI. This is unsurprising since not all ILI cases are caused by influenza. Trivalent 2009-2010 seasonal vaccines had a statistically significant effectiveness in preventing ILI and confirmed pandemic influenza, but were not better in preventing confirmed pandemic influenza than in preventing ILI. This lack of difference might be indicative of selection bias