Effect of monthly vitamin D3 supplementation in healthy adults on adverse effects of earthquakes: randomised controlled trial

Objective: To determine whether supplementation with vitamin D improves resilience to the adverse effects of earthquakes. Design: Opportunistic addition to an established randomised double blind placebo controlled trial. Setting: Christchurch, New Zealand, where a prolonged series of catastrophic earthquakes beginning on 4 September 2010 occurred, which caused widespread destruction, fatalities, and extensive psychological damage. Participants: 322 healthy adults (241 women; 81 men) aged 18-67 who were already participating in the vitamin D and acute respiratory infections study (VIDARIS) between February 2010 and November 2011. Intervention Participants were randomised to receive an oral dose of either 200 000 IU vitamin D3 monthly for two months then 100 000 IU monthly (n=161) or placebo (n=161) for a total of 18 months. Main outcome measure This is a post hoc analysis from the previously published VIDARIS trial. The primary endpoint in the current analysis was the self reported effects and overall adverse impact of the Christchurch earthquakes as assessed by questionnaire four months after the most destructive earthquake on 22 February 2011, which was used as the index event. The secondary end point was the number of “psychological” adverse events that participants reported at their usual monthly appointments as part of the original VIDARIS trial. Results: 308 participants completed the earthquake impact questionnaire (n=152 in the vitamin D group and 156 in the placebo group). There was no significant difference in the number of self reported adverse effects between those receiving vitamin D supplementation and those receiving placebo. There was also no difference in the overall adverse impact score between treatment groups (χ2 P=0.44). The exception was that those in the vitamin D group experienced more adverse effects on family relationships (22% v 13%; χ2 P=0.03). The number of psychological adverse events—such as fatigue, stress, anxiety, and insomnia—that participants reported at their usual monthly appointments was significantly higher after the earthquake (χ2 P=0.007) but did not differ between treatment groups. Conclusion: In this trial, vitamin D supplementation did not reduce the adverse impact of earthquakes in healthy adults. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (anzctr.org.au) ACTRN1260900048622

Predicting the impact of household contact and mass chemoprophylaxis on future new leprosy cases in South Tarawa, Kiribati: A modelling study

BACKGROUND: The country of Kiribati is a small Pacific island nation which had a new case detection rate of 191 per 100,000 in 2016, and is one of the few countries yet to reach the WHO leprosy elimination goal. Chemoprophylaxis of household contacts of new cases, or to the whole population in a highly endemic areas have been found to be effective in reducing new case rates. This study investigated the potential impact of different chemoprophylaxis strategies on future cases in South Tarawa, the main population centre of Kiribati. METHODOLOGY: The microsimulation model SIMCOLEP was calibrated to simulate the South Tarawa population and past leprosy control activities, and replicate annual new cases from 1989 to 2016. The impact of six different strategies for delivering one round of single dose rifampicin (SDR) chemoprophylaxis to household contacts of new cases and/or one or three rounds of SDR to the whole population was modelled from 2017 to 2030. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Our model predicted that continuing the existing control program of high levels of public awareness, passive case detection, and treatment with multidrug treatment would lead to a substantial reduction in cases but this was less effective than all modelled intervention scenarios. Mass chemoprophylaxis led to a faster initial decline in cases than household contact chemoprophylaxis alone, however the decline under the latter was sustained for longer. The greatest cumulative impact was for household contact chemoprophylaxis with three rounds of mass chemoprophylaxis at one-year intervals. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that control of leprosy would be achieved most rapidly with a combination of intensive population-based and household chemoprophylaxis. These findings may be generalisable to other countries where crowding places social contacts as well as household contacts of cases at risk of developing leprosy

Thermal Image Scanning for Influenza Border Screening: Results of an Airport Screening Study

Background: Infrared thermal image scanners (ITIS) appear an attractive option for the mass screening of travellers for influenza, but there are no published data on their performance in airports. Methods: ITIS was used to measure cutaneous temperature in 1275 airline travellers who had agreed to tympanic temperature measurement and respiratory sampling. The prediction by ITIS of tympanic temperature (37.8uC and 37.5uC) and of influenza infection was assessed using Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves and estimated sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value (PPV). Findings: Using front of face ITIS for prediction of tympanic temperature $37.8uC, the area under the ROC curve was 0.86 (95$37.8uC at screening (95%CI 0 % to 12%); three had no influenza symptoms. Conclusion: ITIS performed moderately well in detecting fever but in this study, during a seasonal epidemic of predominantly influenza type B, the proportion of influenza-infected travellers who were febrile was low and ITIS were no

Hand sanitisers for reducing illness absences in primary school children in New Zealand: a cluster randomised controlled trial study protocol

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>New Zealand has relatively high rates of morbidity and mortality from infectious disease compared with other OECD countries, with infectious disease being more prevalent in children compared with others in the population. Consequences of infectious disease in children may have significant economic and social impact beyond the direct effects of the disease on the health of the child; including absence from school, transmission of infectious disease to other pupils, staff, and family members, and time off work for parents/guardians. Reduction of the transmission of infectious disease between children at schools could be an effective way of reducing the community incidence of infectious disease. Alcohol based no-rinse hand sanitisers provide an alternative hand cleaning technology, for which there is some evidence that they may be effective in achieving this. However, very few studies have investigated the effectiveness of hand sanitisers, and importantly, the potential wider economic implications of this intervention have not been established.</p> <p>Aims</p> <p>The primary objective of this trial is to establish if the provision of hand sanitisers in primary schools in the South Island of New Zealand, in addition to an education session on hand hygiene, reduces the incidence rate of absence episodes due to illness in children. In addition, the trial will establish the cost-effectiveness and conduct a cost-benefit analysis of the intervention in this setting.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>A cluster randomised controlled trial will be undertaken to establish the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of hand sanitisers. Sixty-eight primary schools will be recruited from three regions in the South Island of New Zealand. The schools will be randomised, within region, to receive hand sanitisers and an education session on hand hygiene, or an education session on hand hygiene alone. Fifty pupils from each school in years 1 to 6 (generally aged from 5 to 11 years) will be randomly selected for detailed follow-up about their illness absences, providing a total of 3400 pupils. In addition, absence information will be collected on all children from the school rolls. Investigators not involved in the running of the trial, outcome assessors, and the statistician will be blinded to the group allocation until the analysis is completed.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ACTRN12609000478213</p

Cost-effectiveness of problem-solving treatment in comparison with usual care for primary care patients with menthal health problems: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND: Mental health problems are common and are associated with increased disability and health care costs. Problem-Solving Treatment (PST) delivered to these patients by nurses in primary care might be efficient. The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of PST by mental health nurses compared with usual care (UC) by the general practitioner for primary care patients with mental health problems. METHODS: An economic evaluation from a societal perspective was performed alongside a randomized clinical trial. Patients with a positive General Health Questionnaire score (score ≥ 4) and who visited their general practitioner at least three times during the past 6 months were eligible. Outcome measures were improvement on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and QALYs based on the EQ-5D. Resource use was measured using a validated questionnaire. Missing cost and effect data were imputed using multiple imputation techniques. Bootstrapping was used to analyze costs and cost-effectiveness of PST compared with UC. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in clinical outcomes at 9 months. Mean total costs were €4795 in the PST group and €6857 in the UC group. Costs were not statistically significantly different between the two groups (95% CI -4698;359). The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that PST was cost-effective in comparison with UC. Sensitivity analyses confirmed these findings. CONCLUSIONS: PST delivered by nurses seems cost-effective in comparison with UC. However, these results should be interpreted with caution, since the difference in total costs was mainly caused by 3 outliers with extremely high indirect costs in the UC group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Nederlands Trial Register ISRCTN5102101

We should not be complacent about our population-based public health response to the first influenza pandemic of the 21st century

Background: More than a year after an influenza pandemic was declared in June 2009, the World Health Organization declared the pandemic to be over. Evaluations of the pandemic response are beginning to appear in the public domain. Discussion. We argue that, despite the enormous effort made to control the pandemic, it is now time to acknowledge that many of the population-based public health interventions may not have been well considered. Prior to the pandemic, there was limited scientific evidence to support border control measures. In particular no border screening measures would have detected prodromal or asymptomatic infections, and asymptomatic infections with pandemic influenza were common. School closures, when they were partial or of short duration, would not have interrupted spread of the virus in school-aged children, the group with the highest rate of infection worldwide. In most countries where they were available, neuraminidase inhibitors were not distributed quickly enough to have had an effect at the population level, although they will have benefited individuals, and prophylaxis within closed communities will have been effective. A pandemic specific vaccine will have protected the people who received it, although in most countries only a small minority was vaccinated, and often a small minority of those most at risk. The pandemic vaccine was generally not available early enough to have influenced the shape of the first pandemic wave and it is likely that any future pandemic vaccine manufactured using current technology will also be available too late, at least in one hemisphere. Summary. Border screening, school closure, widespread anti-viral prophylaxis and a pandemic-specific vaccine were unlikely to have been effective during a pandemic which was less severe than anticipated in the pandemic plans of many countries. These were cornerstones of the population-based public health response. Similar responses would be even less likely to be effective in a more severe pandemic. We agree with the recommendation from the World Health Organisation that pandemic preparedness plans need review