Hand hygiene and risk of influenza virus infections in the community: a systematic review and meta-analysis

High Adherence to COVID-19 Public Health Preventive Measures in Indigenous Communities in the Canadian Northwest Territories

The aim of this project is to explore perceptions towards and adherence to COVID-19 public health preventive measures in Indigenous communities within Northwest Territories, Canada. Utilizing a cross-sectional study design the project took place within ten Northwest Territories communities between 1st April and 30th November 2021. Convenience sampling methods were utilized and adhered to public health restrictions. Self-identifying Indigenous adults (≥ 18 years old) were invited to complete a semi-structured interviewer-administered questionnaire. Participants (n = 287; 33.1% men, 66.6% women) had a mean age of 41.6 years (SD ± 13.5). Preventive measures were practiced by 98.6% of participants. Most participants reported often or always practicing three measures: avoiding gatherings (67.2%), avoiding usual greetings (63.3%), and limiting contact with high-risk individuals (71.4%). Most participants reported rarely/never practicing self-isolation (67.5%) and self-quarantining (76.5%) measures. Significant associations existed between the August 2021 COVID-19 outbreak and self-quarantining (p = 0.0023), self-isolating (p = 0.0023), and going onto the land (p = 0.0001). Participants found masking and travel restrictions challenging. Sadness and loneliness resulted from limited access to Elders. Kinship and community safety were important to Indigenous community members and influenced COVID-19 preventive measure utilization. The findings can inform culturally specific COVID-19 public health policy development.

A coupled hand and surface hygiene criterion on heterogeneous surface touch networks

Contaminated hands of people and contaminated surfaces of inanimate objects (fomites) can spread microbes that cause enteric and respiratory infections. Thus, hand hygiene and surface hygiene are probably the most widely adopted public health interventions for controlling such infections. However, conclusions of studies on the effectiveness of these interventions are often inconsistent, likely because such studies have examined these interventions separately and thus not detected their interactions, leading to differing conclusions about their individual impact. In this study, it is proposed that hand and environmental surface hygiene (including disinfection) should be coupled to control contamination spread between surfaces, especially within heterogeneous surface touch networks. In these networks, surfaces and individuals have varying contact frequencies and patterns, reflecting the diverse and non-uniform interactions that typically occur in real-world environments. Accordingly, we propose a new theoretical framework to delineate the relationships between hand hygiene and surface hygiene. In addition, the performance of a model based on this framework that used real-world behavioural data from a graduate student office is reported. Moreover, a coupled hygiene criterion for heterogeneous networks is derived. This criterion stipulates that the product of the pathogen-removal rates for hands and surfaces must exceed a cleaning threshold to ensure the exponential decay of contamination. Failure to meet this threshold results in a non-zero steady prevalence of contamination. Furthermore, the cleaning threshold increases as the numbers of surfaces and hands increase, highlighting the significant impact of network structures on hygiene practices. Thus, extensive cleaning may be necessary in crowded indoor environments with many surfaces and occupants, such as cruise ships, to prevent super-large outbreaks of, for example, noroviral infections. Overall, the findings of this study reveal how improved and integrated hygiene control can prevent fomite transmission.

Evaluating hand hygiene knowledge, attitudes, and practices among healthcare workers in post-pandemic H1N1 influenza control: a cross-sectional study from China

Background

This study evaluates the knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) of hand hygiene among healthcare workers, crucial for preventing healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) in medical facilities.

Methodology

This cross-sectional study assessed hand hygiene KAP among healthcare workers across various settings in Hubei, China utilizing a stratified random sampling approach from, December 25, 2023-to-April 25, 2024. A bilingual electronic survey, adapted from validated tools, was disseminated via email and social media to ensure a broad reach. Participants included diverse healthcare professionals who met specific inclusion criteria. Responses were analyzed using R software, employing descriptive and inferential statistics to identify key predictors of hand hygiene behavior and to confirm the reliability of the survey instrument.

Results

The survey of 2,265 healthcare workers revealed that 77% demonstrated comprehensive knowledge of hand hygiene, 80% exhibited positive attitudes, and 94% practiced effective hand hygiene. Notable findings include a significant understanding of hand hygiene's role in preventing respiratory illnesses (58%) and HAIs (41% agreed, 39% unsure). High compliance in practices like washing hands for at least 20 s was evident (84%), though gaps in confidence about hand hygiene techniques were noted (33% confident, 56% unsure). Binary logistic regression analysis indicated that younger healthcare workers (21-30 years) were more likely to exhibit both knowledge (OR = 7.4, 95% CI = 1.44-136, p = 0.059) and positive attitudes (OR = 4.48, 95% CI = 1.73-11.8, p < 0.001) compared to other age groups. Significant associations were found between higher income levels and positive attitudes toward hand hygiene (OR for ≥80,000 = 3.19, 95% CI = 2.05-5.02, p < 0.001), and between knowledge and practices, suggesting that well-informed individuals are more likely to adhere to recommended practices.

Conclusion

The findings reveal robust hand hygiene knowledge but uncover critical confidence gaps among healthcare workers, urging immediate, targeted educational interventions to fortify adherence and prevent infection outbreaks.

Change of epidemiological characteristics of four respiratory viral infections in children before and during COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVES

Viruses are the main infectious agents of acute respiratory infections (ARIs) in children. We aim to describe the changes in epidemic characteristics of viral ARIs in outpatient children before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From 2017 to 2022, the results of viral detection in oral pharyngeal swabs in 479,236 children with ARIs in the outpatient department of Children's Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, were retrospectively analyzed. Viral antigens, including adenovirus (ADV), influenza A (FLUA), influenza B (FLUB) and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) were detected by the colloidal gold method.

RESULTS

The median age was 3.4 (1.6-5.6) years. Among all the children, 159,895 cases (33.4 %) were positive for at least one virus. The total positive rate for ADV, FLUA and FLUB during the pandemic period was lower than during the pre-pandemic period in every season (pre-pandemic period vs. pandemic period11.7 % vs. 4.7 %, 13.9 % vs. 9.2 %, 7.0 % vs. 5.2 %, respectively, with overall p value < 0.001). However, the positive rate fir RSV was not significantly different between the pre-pandemic period and the pandemic period (5.6 % vs. 5.8 %, p = 0.117). Atypical timing of RSV (summer-autumn 2021) and FLUA (summer 2022) was noted.

CONCLUSIONS

Public health interventions for different pathogens are maximally effective. While positive rates for ADV, FLUA and FLUB decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic period, positive rates for RSV remained similar. In RSV and FLUA, off-season outbreaks were observed. Measures need to be taken to protect children from possible infection surges due to immunity debt having accrued over the last three years.

Synthesising the evidence for effective hand hygiene in community settings: an integrated protocol for multiple related systematic reviews

INTRODUCTION

Despite evidence for the efficacy and effectiveness of hand hygiene in reducing the transmission of infectious diseases, there are gaps in global normative guidance around hand hygiene in community settings. The goal of this review is to systematically retrieve and synthesise available evidence on hand hygiene in community settings across four areas: (1) effective hand hygiene; (2) minimum requirements; (3) behaviour change and (4) government measures.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This protocol entails a two-phased approach to identify relevant studies for multiple related systematic reviews. Phase 1 involves a broad search to capture all studies on hand hygiene in community settings. Databases, trial registries, expert consultations and hand searches of reference lists will be used to ensure an exhaustive search. A comprehensive, electronic search strategy will be used to identify studies indexed in PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, CINAHL, Global Health, Cochrane Library, Global Index Medicus, Scopus, PAIS Index, WHO IRIS, UN Digital Library and World Bank eLibrary published in English from January 1980 to March 2023. The outcome of phase 1 will be a reduced sample of studies from which further screening, specific to research questions across the four key areas can be performed. Two reviewers will independently assess each study for inclusion and disagreements will be resolved by a third reviewer. Quantitative and qualitative data will be extracted following best practices. We will assess all studies using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool. All effect measures pertaining to review outcomes will be reported and a narrative synthesis of all studies will be presented including 'data-driven' descriptive themes and 'theory-driven' analytical themes as applicable.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This systematic review is exempt from ethics approval because the work is carried out on published documents. The findings of the reviews will be disseminated in related peer-reviewed journals.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023429145.

Analysis of the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions on influenza during the Coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic by time-series forecasting

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) was first identified in South Korea during the 2019-2020 seasonal influenza epidemic. The social distancing measures, as effective non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), adopted to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 might have influenced influenza activity. We evaluated IFV(influenza virus) activity during the COVID-19 pandemic and the effect of NPI intensity on influenza transmission.

METHODS

IFV activity and epidemic duration during COVID-19 pandemic were predicted under a counterfactual scenario with no NPIs against COVID-19. The Seasonal Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average Model was used to quantify the effects of NPIs on the transmission of influenza virus. Influenza-like illness/1000 outpatients and IFV positivity rate from the 2011-2012 to 2021-2022 seasons were used in this study.

RESULTS

Comparison of the 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 seasonal influenza activities with those in 2013-2019 showed that COVID-19 outbreaks and associated NPIs such as face mask use, school closures, and travel restrictions reduced the influenza incidence by 91%. Without NPIs against COVID-19, the rates of influenza-like illness and IFV positivity would have been high during the influenza epidemic season, as in previous seasons. NPI intensity decreased the transmission of influenza; the magnitude of the reduction increased as the intensity of social-distancing measures increased (weak social distancing; step-by-step daily recovery: 58.10%, strong social distancing; special quarantine measures: 95.12%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that NPIs and personal hygiene can be used to suppress influenza transmission. NPIs against COVID-19 may be useful strategies for the prevention and control of influenza epidemics.

Evolution in the incidence of infectious diseases in the pediatric ENT area during the COVID-19 pandemic

INTRODUCTION

SARS COV-2 infection is an emerging disease that has become a global pandemic since the beginning of 2020. To reduce transmission, measures have been imposed by governments such as home confinement, the use of masks, social distancing or promotion of hand hygiene. The aim of this study is to determine if the measures adopted to reduce the COVID-19 pandemic have produced a decrease in the incidence of infectious diseases and their complications in the ENT area in our center.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective descriptive study was carried out in a tertiary hospital of patients aged between 0 and 15 years who required admission due to deep cervical infections, complications derived from acute otitis media (mastoiditis or facial paralysis) or complicated acute sinusitis.

RESULTS

There is a notable decrease in the number of global admissions in the COVID period (9) compared to the average of the previous 5 years (20.1). Likewise, there are statistically significant differences in the number of admissions for cervical infections (p value=0.027) and complications derived from acute otitis media (p value=0.029).

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

A decrease in the number of admissions caused by complications of infections in the ENT area in paediatric patients has been observed after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in our environment, this fact could be explained by a global decrease in the number of infections of the upper respiratory tract due to the hygienic measures taken by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Effectiveness of handwashing with soap for preventing acute respiratory infections in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute respiratory infection (ARI) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally, with 83% of ARI mortality occurring in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) before the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to estimate the effect of interventions promoting handwashing with soap on ARI in LMICs.

METHODS

In our systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Global Health, and Global Index Medicus for studies of handwashing with soap interventions in LMICs from inception to May 25, 2021. We included randomised and non-randomised controlled studies of interventions conducted in domestic, school, or childcare settings. Interventions promoting hand hygiene methods other than handwashing with soap were excluded, as were interventions in health-care facilities or the workplace. The primary outcome was ARI morbidity arising from any pathogen for participants of any age. Secondary outcomes were lower respiratory infection, upper respiratory infection, influenza confirmed by diagnostic test, COVID-19 confirmed by diagnostic test, and all-cause mortality. We extracted relative risks (RRs), using random-effects meta-analysis to analyse study results, and metaregression to evaluate heterogeneity. We assessed risk of bias in individual studies using an adapted Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and assessed the overall body of evidence using a Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021231414.

FINDINGS

26 studies with 161 659 participants met inclusion criteria, providing 27 comparisons (21 randomised). Interventions promoting handwashing with soap reduced any ARI compared with no handwashing intervention (RR 0·83 [95% CI 0·76-0·90], I2 88%; 27 comparisons). Interventions also reduced lower respiratory infections (0·78 [0·64-0·94], I2 64%; 12 comparisons) and upper respiratory infections (0·74 [0·59-0·93], I2 91%; seven comparisons), but not test-confirmed influenza (0·94 [0·42-2·11], I2 90%; three comparisons), test-confirmed COVID-19 (no comparisons), or all-cause mortality (prevalence ratio 0·95 [95% CI 0·71-1·27]; one comparison). For ARI, no heterogeneity covariates were significant at p<0·1 and the GRADE rating was moderate certainty evidence.

INTERPRETATION

Interventions promoting handwashing with soap can reduce ARI in LMICs, and could help to prevent the large burden of respiratory disease.

FUNDING

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Reckitt Global Hygiene Institute, and UK FCDO.

Risk factors associated with indoor transmission during home quarantine of COVID-19 patients

Purpose

The study aimed to identify potential risk factors for family transmission and to provide precautionary guidelines for the general public during novel Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) waves.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study with numerous COVID-19 patients recruited was conducted in Shanghai. Epidemiological data including transmission details, demographics, vaccination status, symptoms, comorbidities, antigen test, living environment, residential ventilation, disinfection and medical treatment of each participant were collected and risk factors for family transmission were determined.

Results

A total of 2,334 COVID-19 patients participated. Compared with non-cohabitation infected patients, cohabitated ones were younger (p = 0.019), more commonly unvaccinated (p = 0.048) or exposed to infections (p < 0.001), and had higher rates of symptoms (p = 0.003) or shared living room (p < 0.001). Risk factors analysis showed that the 2019-nCov antigen positive (OR = 1.86, 95%CI 1.40-2.48, p < 0.001), symptoms development (OR = 1.86, 95%CI 1.34-2.58, p < 0.001), direct contact exposure (OR = 1.47, 95%CI 1.09-1.96, p = 0.010) were independent risk factors for the cohabitant transmission of COVID-19, and a separate room with a separate toilet could reduce the risk of family transmission (OR = 0.62, 95%CI 0.41-0.92, p = 0.018).

Conclusion

Patients showing negative 2019-nCov antigen tests, being asymptomatic, living in a separate room with a separate toilet, or actively avoiding direct contact with cohabitants were at low risk of family transmission, and the study recommended that avoiding direct contact and residential disinfection could reduce the risk of all cohabitants within the same house being infected with COVID-19.

Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses

BACKGROUND

Viral epidemics or pandemics of acute respiratory infections (ARIs) pose a global threat. Examples are influenza (H1N1) caused by the H1N1pdm09 virus in 2009, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2003, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by SARS-CoV-2 in 2019. Antiviral drugs and vaccines may be insufficient to prevent their spread. This is an update of a Cochrane Review last published in 2020. We include results from studies from the current COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of acute respiratory viruses.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and two trials registers in October 2022, with backwards and forwards citation analysis on the new studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs investigating physical interventions (screening at entry ports, isolation, quarantine, physical distancing, personal protection, hand hygiene, face masks, glasses, and gargling) to prevent respiratory virus transmission.  DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 new RCTs and cluster-RCTs (610,872 participants) in this update, bringing the total number of RCTs to 78. Six of the new trials were conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic; two from Mexico, and one each from Denmark, Bangladesh, England, and Norway. We identified four ongoing studies, of which one is completed, but unreported, evaluating masks concurrent with the COVID-19 pandemic. Many studies were conducted during non-epidemic influenza periods. Several were conducted during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic, and others in epidemic influenza seasons up to 2016. Therefore, many studies were conducted in the context of lower respiratory viral circulation and transmission compared to COVID-19. The included studies were conducted in heterogeneous settings, ranging from suburban schools to hospital wards in high-income countries; crowded inner city settings in low-income countries; and an immigrant neighbourhood in a high-income country. Adherence with interventions was low in many studies. The risk of bias for the RCTs and cluster-RCTs was mostly high or unclear. Medical/surgical masks compared to no masks We included 12 trials (10 cluster-RCTs) comparing medical/surgical masks versus no masks to prevent the spread of viral respiratory illness (two trials with healthcare workers and 10 in the community). Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza-like illness (ILI)/COVID-19 like illness compared to not wearing masks (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.09; 9 trials, 276,917 participants; moderate-certainty evidence. Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory-confirmed influenza/SARS-CoV-2 compared to not wearing masks (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.42; 6 trials, 13,919 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Harms were rarely measured and poorly reported (very low-certainty evidence). N95/P2 respirators compared to medical/surgical masks We pooled trials comparing N95/P2 respirators with medical/surgical masks (four in healthcare settings and one in a household setting). We are very uncertain on the effects of N95/P2 respirators compared with medical/surgical masks on the outcome of clinical respiratory illness (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.10; 3 trials, 7779 participants; very low-certainty evidence). N95/P2 respirators compared with medical/surgical masks may be effective for ILI (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.03; 5 trials, 8407 participants; low-certainty evidence). Evidence is limited by imprecision and heterogeneity for these subjective outcomes. The use of a N95/P2 respirators compared to medical/surgical masks probably makes little or no difference for the objective and more precise outcome of laboratory-confirmed influenza infection (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.34; 5 trials, 8407 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Restricting pooling to healthcare workers made no difference to the overall findings. Harms were poorly measured and reported, but discomfort wearing medical/surgical masks or N95/P2 respirators was mentioned in several studies (very low-certainty evidence).  One previously reported ongoing RCT has now been published and observed that medical/surgical masks were non-inferior to N95 respirators in a large study of 1009 healthcare workers in four countries providing direct care to COVID-19 patients.  Hand hygiene compared to control Nineteen trials compared hand hygiene interventions with controls with sufficient data to include in meta-analyses. Settings included schools, childcare centres and homes. Comparing hand hygiene interventions with controls (i.e. no intervention), there was a 14% relative reduction in the number of people with ARIs in the hand hygiene group (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.90; 9 trials, 52,105 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), suggesting a probable benefit. In absolute terms this benefit would result in a reduction from 380 events per 1000 people to 327 per 1000 people (95% CI 308 to 342). When considering the more strictly defined outcomes of ILI and laboratory-confirmed influenza, the estimates of effect for ILI (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.09; 11 trials, 34,503 participants; low-certainty evidence), and laboratory-confirmed influenza (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.30; 8 trials, 8332 participants; low-certainty evidence), suggest the intervention made little or no difference. We pooled 19 trials (71, 210 participants) for the composite outcome of ARI or ILI or influenza, with each study only contributing once and the most comprehensive outcome reported. Pooled data showed that hand hygiene may be beneficial with an 11% relative reduction of respiratory illness (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.94; low-certainty evidence), but with high heterogeneity. In absolute terms this benefit would result in a reduction from 200 events per 1000 people to 178 per 1000 people (95% CI 166 to 188). Few trials measured and reported harms (very low-certainty evidence). We found no RCTs on gowns and gloves, face shields, or screening at entry ports.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The high risk of bias in the trials, variation in outcome measurement, and relatively low adherence with the interventions during the studies hampers drawing firm conclusions. There were additional RCTs during the pandemic related to physical interventions but a relative paucity given the importance of the question of masking and its relative effectiveness and the concomitant measures of mask adherence which would be highly relevant to the measurement of effectiveness, especially in the elderly and in young children. There is uncertainty about the effects of face masks. The low to moderate certainty of evidence means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited, and that the true effect may be different from the observed estimate of the effect. The pooled results of RCTs did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical/surgical masks. There were no clear differences between the use of medical/surgical masks compared with N95/P2 respirators in healthcare workers when used in routine care to reduce respiratory viral infection. Hand hygiene is likely to modestly reduce the burden of respiratory illness, and although this effect was also present when ILI and laboratory-confirmed influenza were analysed separately, it was not found to be a significant difference for the latter two outcomes. Harms associated with physical interventions were under-investigated. There is a need for large, well-designed RCTs addressing the effectiveness of many of these interventions in multiple settings and populations, as well as the impact of adherence on effectiveness, especially in those most at risk of ARIs.

Vaccine or Garlic-Is It a Choice? Awareness of Medical Personnel on Prevention of Influenza Infections

BACKGROUND

Preventing the spread of the influenza virus is one of the primary health policy challenges of many countries worldwide. One of the more effective ways to prevent infection is influenza vaccination, and the people who enjoy the most public confidence in preventive health care are health workers (HWs). For this reason, it is crucial to study the attitudes of HWs toward influenza vaccination.

METHODS

The survey was conducted among 950 medical (physicians and nurses) and administrative staff in three academic hospitals. Respondents to the survey were selected on a random-target basis to represent hospital employees in the study best. The survey was conducted using the PAPI method between August and September 2020.

RESULTS

Respondents considered hand washing (52.8%) and avoiding contact with sick people (49.3%) the most effective ways to prevent influenza infection. Three in ten respondents considered wearing a protective mask (30.1%) and getting vaccinated against influenza (29.9%) is fully effective in preventing influenza. Influenza vaccination as effective in preventing influenza virus infection was chosen more often by those who worked in a pediatric hospital. Nurses were twice less likely than physicians to declare that influenza vaccination prevents infection (42.4% for nurses vs. 84.0% for physicians). At the same time, 20.4% of nurses believed that eating garlic effectively prevented influenza infection, and 28.1% declared daily vitamin C helpful.

CONCLUSIONS

The study pointed to significant educational gaps regarding the role and effectiveness of influenza vaccination in the process of influenza virus infection and indicated a firm belief in medical myths, especially in the nursing community, related to protection against influenza virus infection.

[Evolution in the incidence of infectious diseases in the pediatric ENT area during the COVID-19 pandemic]

INTRODUCTION

SARS COV-2 infection is an emerging disease that has become a global pandemic since the beginning of 2020. To reduce transmission, measures have been imposed by governments such as home confinement, the use of masks, social distancing or promotion of hand hygiene. The aim of this study is to determine if the measures adopted to reduce the COVID-19 pandemic have produced a decrease in the incidence of infectious diseases and their complications in the ENT area in our center.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective descriptive study was carried out in a tertiary hospital of patients aged between 0 and 15 years who required admission due to deep cervical infections, complications derived from acute otitis media (mastoiditis or facial paralysis) or complicated acute sinusitis.

RESULTS

There is a notable decrease in the number of global admissions in the COVID period (9) compared to the average of the previous 5 years (20.1). Likewise, there are statistically significant differences in the number of admissions for cervical infections (p value= 0.027) and complications derived from acute otitis media (p value= 0.029).

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

A decrease in the number of admissions caused by complications of infections in the ENT area in paediatric patients has been observed after the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in our environment, this fact could be explained by a global decrease in the number of infections of the upper respiratory tract due to the hygienic measures taken by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Airborne Transmission and Control of Influenza and Other Respiratory Pathogens

Despite uncertainty about the specific transmission risk posed by airborne, spray-borne, and contact modes for influenza, SARS-CoV-2, and other respiratory viruses, there is evidence that airborne transmission via inhalation is important and often predominates. An early study of influenza transmission via airborne challenge quantified infectious doses as low as one influenza virion leading to illness characterized by cough and sore throat. Other studies that challenged via intranasal mucosal exposure observed high doses required for similarly symptomatic respiratory illnesses. Analysis of the Evaluating Modes of Influenza Transmission (EMIT) influenza human-challenge transmission trial—of 52 H3N2 inoculated viral donors and 75 sero-susceptible exposed individuals—quantifies airborne transmission and provides context and insight into methodology related to airborne transmission. Advances in aerosol sampling and epidemiologic studies examining the role of masking, and engineering-based air hygiene strategies provide a foundation for understanding risk and directions for new work.

System dynamic modelling of healthcare associated influenza -a tool for infection control

BACKGROUND

The transmission dynamics of influenza virus within healthcare settings are not fully understood. Capturing the interplay between host, viral and environmental factors is difficult using conventional research methods. Instead, system dynamic modelling may be used to illustrate the complex scenarios including non-linear relationships and multiple interactions which occur within hospitals during a seasonal influenza epidemic. We developed such a model intended as a support for health-care providers in identifying potentially effective control strategies to prevent influenza transmission.

METHODS

By using computer simulation software, we constructed a system dynamic model to illustrate transmission dynamics within a large acute-care hospital. We used local real-world clinical and epidemiological data collected during the season 2016/17, as well as data from the national surveillance programs and relevant publications to form the basic structure of the model. Multiple stepwise simulations were performed to identify the relative effectiveness of various control strategies and to produce estimates of the accumulated number of healthcare-associated influenza cases per season.

RESULTS

Scenarios regarding the number of patients exposed for influenza virus by shared room and the extent of antiviral prophylaxis and treatment were investigated in relation to estimations of influenza vaccine coverage, vaccine effectiveness and inflow of patients with influenza. In total, 680 simulations were performed, of which each one resulted in an estimated number per season. The most effective preventive measure identified by our model was administration of antiviral prophylaxis to exposed patients followed by reducing the number of patients receiving care in shared rooms.

CONCLUSIONS

This study presents an system dynamic model that can be used to capture the complex dynamics of in-hospital transmission of viral infections and identify potentially effective interventions to prevent healthcare-associated influenza infections. Our simulations identified antiviral prophylaxis as the most effective way to control in-hospital influenza transmission.

The potential impact of intensified community hand hygiene interventions on respiratory tract infections: a modelling study

Hand hygiene is among the most fundamental and widely used behavioural measures to reduce the person-to-person spread of human pathogens and its effectiveness as a community intervention is supported by evidence from randomized trials. However, a theoretical understanding of the relationship between hand hygiene frequency and change in risk of infection is lacking. Using a simple model-based framework for understanding the determinants of hand hygiene effectiveness in preventing viral respiratory tract infections, we show that a crucial, but overlooked, determinant of the relationship between hand hygiene frequency and risk of infection via indirect transmission is persistence of viable virus on hands. If persistence is short, as has been reported for influenza, hand-washing needs to be performed very frequently or immediately after hand contamination to substantially reduce the probability of infection. When viable virus survival is longer (e.g. in the presence of mucus or for some enveloped viruses) less frequent hand washing can substantially reduce the infection probability. Immediate hand washing after contamination is consistently more effective than at fixed-time intervals. Our study highlights that recommendations on hand hygiene should be tailored to persistence of viable virus on hands and that more detailed empirical investigations are needed to help optimize this key intervention.

The role of non-pharmaceutical interventions on influenza circulation during the COVID-19 pandemic in nine tropical Asian countries

BACKGROUND

Low global influenza circulation was reported during the coronavirus-19 pandemic. We explored relationships between non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) and influenza in tropical Asian countries.

METHODS

Using World Health Organization (WHO) surveillance data from 2015 to 2019 and the WHO shiny app, we constructed expected seasonal influenza epidemic curves from March 2020 to June 2021 and compared the timing, and average percent positivity with observed data. We used multivariate regression to test associations between ordinal NPI data (from the Oxford Stringency Index) 4 weeks before the expected 2020/21 epidemics and present adjusted incidence rate ratio (IRR) or relative proportion ratio (RPR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Data from nine countries predicted 18 seasonal epidemics; seven were observed. Five started 6-24 weeks later, and all were 4-21 weeks shorter than expected. Five epidemics had lower maximum peak values (percent positivity), and all but one had lower average percent positivity than expected. All countries implemented NPIs. Each increased level of school closure reduced risk of an epidemic by 43% (IRR = 0.57, CI: 0.34, 0.95). Each increased level of canceling public events reduced the average percent positivity across the season by 44% (RPR = 0.56, CI: 0.39, 0.82) and each increased level in restricting internal movements reduced it by 41% (RPR = 0.59, CI: 0.36, 0.96). Other NPIs were not associated with changes.

CONCLUSIONS

Among nine countries, the 2020/21 seasonal epidemics were delayed, shorter, and less intense than expected. Although layered NPIs were difficult to tease apart, school closings, canceling public events, and restricting internal movements before influenza circulation seemed to reduce transmission.

Nonpharmaceutical interventions to prevent viral respiratory infection in community settings: an umbrella review

Background

Respiratory viruses pose an important public health threat to most communities. Nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) such as masks, hand hygiene or physical distancing, among others, are believed to play an important role in reducing transmission of respiratory viruses. In this umbrella review, we summarise the evidence of the effectiveness of NPIs for the prevention of respiratory virus transmission in the community setting.

Observations

A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Medline and Cochrane reviews resulted in a total of 24 studies consisting of 11 systematic reviews and meta-analyses, 12 systematic reviews without meta-analyses and one standalone meta-analysis. The current evidence from these data suggests that hand hygiene is protective against respiratory viral infection. The use of hand hygiene and facemasks, facemasks alone and physical distancing were interventions with inconsistent evidence. Interventions such as school closures, oral hygiene or nasal saline rinses were shown to be effective in reducing the risk of influenza; however, the evidence is sparse and mostly of low and critically low quality.

Conclusions

Studies on the effectiveness of NPIs for the prevention of respiratory viral transmission in the community vary in study design, quality and reported effectiveness. Evidence for the use of hand hygiene or facemasks is the strongest; therefore, the most reasonable suggestion is to use hand hygiene and facemasks in the community setting.

The effect of hand hygiene frequency on reducing acute respiratory infections in the community: a meta-analysis

Hand hygiene is a simple, low-cost intervention that may lead to substantial population-level effects in suppressing acute respiratory infection epidemics. However, quantification of the efficacy of hand hygiene on respiratory infection in the community is lacking. We searched PubMed for randomised controlled trials on the effect of hand hygiene for reducing acute respiratory infections in the community published before 11 March 2021. We performed a meta-regression analysis using a Bayesian mixed-effects model. A total of 105 publications were identified, out of which six studies reported hand hygiene frequencies. Four studies were performed in household settings and two were in schools. The average number of handwashing events per day ranged from one to eight in the control arms, and four to 17 in the intervention arms. We estimated that a single hand hygiene event is associated with a 3% (80% credible interval (-1% to 7%)) decrease in the daily probability of an acute respiratory infection. Three of these six studies were potentially at high risk of bias because the primary outcome depended on self-reporting of upper respiratory tract symptoms. Well-designed trials with an emphasis on monitoring hand hygiene adherence are needed to confirm these findings.

Effectiveness of Mask-Wearing on Respiratory Illness Transmission in Community Settings: A Rapid Review

OBJECTIVE

Respiratory illnesses, including coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), have resulted in millions of deaths globally. Guidance on mask-wearing in community settings has been inconsistent. This review examined the effectiveness of mask-wearing on respiratory virus transmission in community settings.

METHODS

A search was conducted for English language reports of randomized controlled trials of mask-wearing in the community and effect on laboratory-confirmed respiratory infections or influenza-like illness. Investigators abstracted study characteristics and assessed bias. Meta-analysis was conducted to calculate pooled risk estimates.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were included. In 7 studies that evaluated influenza-like illness symptoms as an outcome (3029 participants), this study found mask-wearing associated with a decreased risk of influenza-like illness (overall risk ratio [RR], 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 0.96). Studies examining laboratory-confirmed respiratory infections as an outcome (10,531 participants) showed no statistically significant association between mask-wearing and infections (RR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.60-1.80). However, masking combined with enhanced hand hygiene was associated with a decreased risk for both influenza-like illness symptoms (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.51-1.51) and laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection (RR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.52-1.18).

CONCLUSIONS

Masking in community settings decreases transmission of influenza-like illness. Mask-wearing combined with enhanced hand hygiene reduces transmission of influenza-like illness and laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection.

Selected Livestock-Associated Zoonoses as a Growing Challenge for Public Health

The aim of this paper is to review the most significant livestock-associated zoonoses. Human and animal health are intimately connected. This idea has been known for more than a century but now it has gained special importance because of the increasing threat from zoonoses. Zoonosis is defined as any infection naturally transmissible from vertebrate animals to humans. As the frequency and prevalence of zoonotic diseases increase worldwide, they become a real threat to public health. In addition, many of the newly discovered diseases have a zoonotic origin. Due to globalization and urbanization, some of these diseases have already spread all over the world, caused by the international flow of goods, people, and animals. However, special attention should be paid to farm animals since, apart from the direct contact, humans consume their products, such as meat, eggs, and milk. Therefore, zoonoses such as salmonellosis, campylobacteriosis, tuberculosis, swine and avian influenza, Q fever, brucellosis, STEC infections, and listeriosis are crucial for both veterinary and human medicine. Consequently, in the suspicion of any zoonoses outbreak, the medical and veterinary services should closely cooperate to protect the public health.

A strict mask policy for hospital staff effectively prevents from nosocomial influenza infections and mortality: monocentric data from five consecutive influenza seasons

BACKGROUND

Influenza infections acquired in hospital show increased mortality, especially in elderly patients with risk factors. Nevertheless, vaccination rates are low among both high-risk patients and healthcare workers (HCW). To more effectively prevent influenza infections in the hospital during the influenza season, we introduced a strict mouth-nose protection (MNP) requirement for all staff throughout the shift on the affected wards as an intervention and studied its effect on nosocomial infection rates.

METHODOLOGY

The present data were obtained in a retrospective, monocentric analysis over a period of four consecutive influenza seasons from 2015 - 2019. MNP for all staff during the whole shift as an intervention was introduced at 2017 and for the following seasons if at least three flu patients were in the ward at the same time. Data from hospitalised influenza patients before and after intervention were compared with regard to nosocomial incidences and mortality.

RESULTS

In the years with strict mandatory MNP (2017 - 2019), the nosocomial influenza incidence fell nearly 50 % (OR 0.40, 95%CI 0.28 - 0.56, p < 0.001) accompanied by a significant reduction in nosocomial mortality by 85% (OR 0.15, 95%CI 0.02 - 0.70, p = 0.007). The infectious pressure indicated by influenza incidences and patient days at risk were comparable before and after intervention, as was the low rate of vaccine uptake by nurses.

CONCLUSION

From our data, we conclude that mandatory MNP for HCW effectively protect patients from nosocomial influenza infections and mortality.

Skin care and hygiene among healthcare professionals during and after the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic has necessitated enhanced protection against viral transmission among healthcare professionals, particularly relating to handwashing and personal protective equipment. Some of these requirements may persist for years to come. They bring associated concerns around skin hygiene and general care, with damage to the face and hands now a well-documented consequence among healthcare professionals. This review assesses optimal skin care during the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic and in the "new normal" that will follow, identifies current knowledge gaps, and provides practical advice for the clinical setting. Regular, systematic hand cleaning with soap and water or an alcohol-based hand rub (containing 60%-90% ethanol or isopropyl alcohol) remains essential, although the optimal quantity and duration is unclear. Gloves are a useful additional barrier; further studies are needed on preferred materials. Moisturization is typically helpful and has proven benefits in mitigating damage from frequent handwashing. It may be best practiced using an alcohol-based hand rub with added moisturizer and could be particularly important among individuals with pre-existing hand dermatoses, such as psoriasis and eczema. Face moisturization immediately prior to donning a mask, and the use of dressings under the mask to reduce friction, can be helpful dermatologically, but more work is required to prove that these actions do not affect seal integrity. Nonetheless, such measures could play a role in institutional plans for mitigating the dermatologic impact of transmission control measures as we exit the pandemic.

Influenza

Seasonal influenza epidemics of variable severity pose challenges to public health. Annual vaccination is the primary way to prevent influenza, and a wide range of vaccines are available, including inactivated or live attenuated standard-dose, recombinant vaccines, as well as adjuvanted or high-dose vaccines for persons aged 65 years or older. Persons at increased risk for influenza complications include young children, persons with underlying medical conditions, and older adults. Prompt diagnosis of influenza can facilitate early initiation of antiviral treatment that provides the greatest clinical benefit. This article summarizes recommendations for providers on influenza vaccination, diagnostic testing, and antiviral treatment.

Nationwide Social Distancing and the Epidemiology of Severe Acute Respiratory Infections

Nonpharmaceutical interventions (e.g., social distancing) are recommended to prevent the spread of respiratory viruses. However, few epidemiological studies have assessed whether social distancing in actual settings reduces the disease burden of severe acute respiratory infections (SARIs) in the general population. Accordingly, we aimed to assess associations between nationwide social distancing for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and non-COVID-19 SARIs. We collected data on SARI epidemiologic characteristics recorded from January 2018 through December 2020 from the nationwide sentinel SARI surveillance data maintained by the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency. The number of SARIs per 1000 hospitalized patients decreased significantly to 18.61, 18.15, and 6.25 in 2018, 2019, and 2020 (p<0.001), respectively, during the surveillance period of 3 years. The number of intensive care unit admissions associated with SARIs per 1000 hospitalized patients was 0.83, 0.69, and 0.54 in 2018, 2019, and 2020 (p<0.001), respectively, and the number of SARI-associated mortalities per 1000 patients was 0.42, 0.29, and 0.27 in 2018, 2019, and 2020 (p<0.001), respectively. Moreover, SARIs had two peak seasons in 2 years of the surveillance period (2018 and 2019). However, seasonality was not observed since social distancing was initiated. Our sentinel surveillance data demonstrated a remarkable reduction in SARI disease burden and a change in seasonality following the implementation of nationwide social distancing. Accordingly, we suggest that social distancing could be effective in forthcoming seasonal epidemics of non-COVID19 origin, although the impact thereof on other aspects of society needs to be carefully considered.

Avoidance of COVID-19 for Children and Adolescents and Isolation Precautions

Limiting exposure to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus has been the major principle guiding public health measures. Masking, social distancing, as well as frequent hand hygiene have been the chief nonpharmaceutical interventions as preventive strategies for all age groups. Advancement in vaccine development and vaccination of large populations offer a glimmer of hope for containing and ending this pandemic. However, until immunization is widespread in the community, masking, social distancing, and frequent handwashing, as well as early detection and isolation of infected persons, should be continued to curb the spread of illness.

The effect of hand hygiene promotion programs during epidemics and pandemics of respiratory droplet-transmissible infections on health outcomes: a rapid systematic review

BACKGROUND

Public health strategies in the context of respiratory droplet-transmissible diseases (such as influenza or COVID-19) include intensified hand hygiene promotion, but a review on the effectiveness of different ways of promoting hand hygiene in the community, specifically for this type of infections, has not been performed. This rapid systematic review aims to summarize the effectiveness of community-based hand hygiene promotion programs on infection transmission, health outcomes and behavioral outcomes during epidemic periods in the context of respiratory droplet-transmissible diseases. We also included laboratory-confirmed health outcomes for epidemic-prone disease during interepidemic periods.

METHODS

We searched for controlled experimental studies. A rapid systematic review was performed in three databases and a COVID-19 resource. Following study selection (in which studies performed in the (pre-)hospital/health care setting were excluded), study characteristics and effect measures were synthesized, using meta-analyses of cluster-RCTs where possible. Risk of bias of each study was assessed and the certainty of evidence was appraised according to the GRADE methodology.

RESULTS

Out of 2050 unique references, 12 cluster-RCTs, all in the context of influenza, were selected. There were no controlled experimental studies evaluating the effectiveness of hand hygiene promotion programs in the context of COVID-19 that met the in-/exclusion criteria. There was evidence that preventive hand hygiene promotion interventions in interepidemic periods significantly decreased influenza positive cases in the school setting. However, no improvement could be demonstrated for programs implemented in households to prevent secondary influenza transmission from previously identified cases (epidemic and interepidemic periods).

CONCLUSIONS

The data suggest that proactive hand hygiene promotion interventions, i.e. regardless of the identification of infected cases, can improve health outcomes upon implementation of such a program, in contrast to reactive interventions in which the program is implemented after (household) index cases are identified.

Preventive effects of tea and tea catechins against influenza and acute upper respiratory tract infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

Gargling with tea has protective effects against influenza infection and upper respiratory tract infection (URTI). To evaluate if tea and tea catechin consumption has the same protective effects as gargling with tea, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Methods

We performed a comprehensive literature search using the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Ichu-shi Web databases. The search provided six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and four prospective cohort studies (n = 3748). The quality of each trial or study was evaluated according to the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool or Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. We collected data from publications meeting the search criteria and conducted a meta-analysis of the effect of tea gargling and tea catechin consumption for preventing URTI using a random effects model.

Results

Tea gargling and tea catechin consumption had significant preventive effects against URTI (risk ratio [RR] = 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64–0.87). In sub-analyses, a significant preventive effect was observed by study type (prospective cohort study: RR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.50–0.91; RCT: RR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.66–0.94) and disease type (influenza: RR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.58–0.84; acute URTI: RR = 0.78, 95% CI 0.62–0.98). Both gargling with tea and consuming tea catechins effectively protected against URTI (tea and tea catechins consumption: RR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.52–0.87; tea gargling: RR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.72–0.96).

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that tea gargling and tea catechin consumption may have preventive effects against influenza infection and URTI. The potential effectiveness of these actions as non-pharmaceutical interventions, however, requires further investigation.

Efficacy of face masks against respiratory infectious diseases: a systematic review and network analysis of randomized-controlled trials

During the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, face masks are among the most common and practical control measures used globally in reducing the risk of infection and disease transmission. Although several studies have investigated the efficacy of various face masks and respirators in preventing infection, the results have been inconsistent. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of the randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the actual efficacy of face masks in preventing respiratory infections. We searched nine electronic databases up to July 2020 to find potential articles. We accepted trials reporting the protective efficacy of face masks against respiratory infections, of which the primary endpoint was the presence of respiratory infections. We used the ROB-2 Cochrane tool to grade the trial quality. We initially registered the protocol for this study in PROSPERO (CRD42020178516). Sixteen RCTs involving 17 048 individuals were included for NMA. Overall, evidence was weak, lacking statistical power due to the small number of participants, and there was substantial inconsistency in our findings. In comparison to those without face masks, participants with fit-tested N95 respirators were likely to have lesser infection risk (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.38-1.19,P-score 0.80), followed by those with non-fit-tested N95 and non-fit-tested FFP2 respirators that shared the similar risk, (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.12-4.36,P-score 0.63) and (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.38-1.71,P-score 0.63), respectively. Next, participants who donned face masks with and without hand hygiene practices showed modest risk improvement alike (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.67-1.17,P-score 0.55) and (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.70-1.22,P-score 0.51). Otherwise, participants donning double-layered cloth masks were prone to infection (RR 4.80, 95% CI 1.42-16.27,P-score 0.01). Eleven out of 16 RCTs that underwent a pairwise meta-analysis revealed a substantially lower infection risk in those donning medical face masks (MFMs) than those without face masks (RR 0.83 95% CI 0.71-0.96). Given the body of evidence through a systematic review and meta-analyses, our findings supported the protective benefits of MFMs in reducing respiratory transmissions, and the universal mask-wearing should be applied-especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. More clinical data is required to conclude the efficiency of cloth masks; in the short term, users should not use cloth face masks in the outbreak hot spots and places where social distancing is impossible.

Decrease of infectious complications in outpatients with autoimmune diseases from 2019 to 2020 under the COVID-19 pandemic: A single-centre, retrospective cohort study in Japan

OBJECTIVES

To examine how the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has changed infectious complications in outpatients with autoimmune diseases.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective, record-linked cohort study and questionnaire about lifestyle changes in patients who visited our department in 2019 and 2020.

RESULTS

We surveyed 1316 outpatients in 2019 and 1284 in 2020. The most common underlying diseases were rheumatoid arthritis (842 vs. 814) and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) (126 vs. 127). No significant difference in median age (66 vs. 67 years), respiratory comorbidities (30.4% vs. 32.0%), or corticosteroid use (42.2% vs. 44.3%) was found between the years. Immunomodulating agents were used more in 2020 (33.1% vs. 39.7%, p < .001). Total number of infections (28.0/100 vs. 19.4/100 person-years), pneumonia (3.6 vs. 1.6), influenza (2.1 vs. 0.1), and nonviral dermatological infections (3.8 vs. 2.1) were significantly lower in 2020. No significant difference was found for herpes zoster (2.2 vs. 1.8), urinary tract infections (3.3 vs. 3.8), or gastrointestinal infections (2.9 vs. 3.0). According to the questionnaire, 75% of the respondents became more conscious about wearing masks and 81% began to use hand sanitizer during the pandemic.

CONCLUSION

Under the COVID-19 pandemic, some infectious complications have decreased in outpatients with autoimmune diseases.

Soap versus sanitiser for preventing the transmission of acute respiratory infections in the community: a systematic review with meta-analysis and dose-response analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of hand hygiene using alcohol-based hand sanitiser to soap and water for preventing the transmission of acute respiratory infections (ARIs) and to assess the relationship between the dose of hand hygiene and the number of ARI, influenza-like illness (ILI) or influenza events.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and trial registries were searched in April 2020.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that compared a community-based hand hygiene intervention (soap and water, or sanitiser) with a control, or trials that compared sanitiser with soap and water, and measured outcomes of ARI, ILI or laboratory-confirmed influenza or related consequences.

DATA EXTRACTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts for inclusion and extracted data.

RESULTS

Eighteen trials were included. When meta-analysed, three trials of soap and water versus control found a non-significant increase in ARI events (risk ratio (RR) 1.23, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.93); six trials of sanitiser versus control found a significant reduction in ARI events (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.89). When hand hygiene dose was plotted against ARI relative risk, no clear dose-response relationship was observable. Four trials were head-to-head comparisons of sanitiser and soap and water but too heterogeneous to pool: two found a significantly greater reduction in the sanitiser group compared with the soap group and two found no significant difference between the intervention arms.

CONCLUSIONS

Adequately performed hand hygiene, with either soap or sanitiser, reduces the risk of ARI virus transmission; however, direct and indirect evidence suggest sanitiser might be more effective in practice.

Transmissibility and transmission of respiratory viruses

Human respiratory virus infections lead to a spectrum of respiratory symptoms and disease severity, contributing to substantial morbidity, mortality and economic losses worldwide, as seen in the COVID-19 pandemic. Belonging to diverse families, respiratory viruses differ in how easy they spread (transmissibility) and the mechanism (modes) of transmission. Transmissibility as estimated by the basic reproduction number (R0) or secondary attack rate is heterogeneous for the same virus. Respiratory viruses can be transmitted via four major modes of transmission: direct (physical) contact, indirect contact (fomite), (large) droplets and (fine) aerosols. We know little about the relative contribution of each mode to the transmission of a particular virus in different settings, and how its variation affects transmissibility and transmission dynamics. Discussion on the particle size threshold between droplets and aerosols and the importance of aerosol transmission for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and influenza virus is ongoing. Mechanistic evidence supports the efficacies of non-pharmaceutical interventions with regard to virus reduction; however, more data are needed on their effectiveness in reducing transmission. Understanding the relative contribution of different modes to transmission is crucial to inform the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions in the population. Intervening against multiple modes of transmission should be more effective than acting on a single mode.

Non-adherence to preventive behaviours during the COVID-19 epidemic: findings from a community study

Backgrounds

Preventive behaviours are an essential way to slow down and eliminate the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. The aim of this study was to estimate adherence to preventive behaviors and to identify whether any subgroups were not adopting these behaviours and for whom greater engagement in these approaches was indicated.

Methods

In this cross-sectional study, we obtained data from a random sample of a panel representing men and women of adult age residing in Hungary (N = 5254). The survey included questions about the frequencies of preventive behaviours, perceived susceptibility and severity of COVID-19.

Results

We found four factors of preventive behaviours: using physical barriers (mask and gloves), avoidance of close contacts, personal hygiene, and preparation. We identified two broadly adherent groups (36.8 and 45.3%) and two non-adherent groups (13.1 and 4.8%). Being male and being aged between 18 and 29 years were the strongest predictors of non-adherence. Concern about the severity of COVID-19 was a predictor of adherence.

Conclusions

To ensure maximal adherence to preventive behaviours for COVID-19, additional strategies should focus on their adoption by men and young adults.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-021-11506-0.

Who complies with coronavirus disease 2019 precautions and who does not?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) virus imposes a higher risk of complications and mortality among people with mental disorders. Until widely available vaccines, adherence to preventive behaviours remains the most crucial tool to prevent SARS/COVID-19 virus transmission. Our review focuses on the determinants of adherence behaviours.

RECENT FINDINGS

Adherence behaviours include the use of a face mask and protective gloves, personal hygienic behaviours (handwashing or using hand sanitiser), and keeping physical distance and avoiding social gatherings. In almost all studies, males and younger people show less adherence. Risk perception and health beliefs (especially perceived severity of COVID-19 related conditions) can explain the sex and age differences in adherence. Studies covering the impact of mental disorders on adherence are surprisingly missing, with the exception of smoking.

SUMMARY

Engaging men and young people in adopting preventive behaviours is crucial in protecting the whole community and specific vulnerable populations. There is a lack of studies investigating preventive behaviours among people living with mental disorders and addiction problems. Furthermore, descriptive and intervention studies are needed to understand and improve the adherence of this population to preventive behaviours.

Hand Hygiene Practices and the Risk of Human Coronavirus Infections in a UK Community Cohort

Background: Hand hygiene may mitigate the spread of COVID-19 in community settings; however, empirical evidence is limited. Given reports of similar transmission mechanisms for COVID-19 and seasonal coronaviruses, we investigated whether hand hygiene impacted the risk of acquiring seasonal coronavirus infections. Methods: Data were drawn from three successive winter cohorts (2006-2009) of the England-wide Flu Watch study.  Participants ( n=1633) provided baseline estimates of hand hygiene behaviour. Coronavirus infections were identified from nasal swabs using RT-PCR. Poisson mixed models estimated the effect of hand hygiene on personal risk of coronavirus illness, both unadjusted and adjusted for confounding by age and healthcare worker status. Results: Moderate-frequency handwashing (6-10 times per day) predicted a lower personal risk of coronavirus infection (adjusted incidence rate ratio (aIRR) =0.64, p=0.04). There was no evidence for a dose-response effect of handwashing, with results for higher levels of hand hygiene (>10 times per day) not significant (aIRR =0.83, p=0.42). Conclusions: This is the first empirical evidence that regular handwashing can reduce personal risk of acquiring seasonal coronavirus infection. These findings support clear public health messaging around the protective effects of hand washing in the context of the current COVID-19 pandemic.

Expiratory aerosol particle escape from surgical masks due to imperfect sealing

Wearing surgical masks or other similar face coverings can reduce the emission of expiratory particles produced via breathing, talking, coughing, or sneezing. Although it is well established that some fraction of the expiratory airflow leaks around the edges of the mask, it is unclear how these leakage airflows affect the overall efficiency with which masks block emission of expiratory aerosol particles. Here, we show experimentally that the aerosol particle concentrations in the leakage airflows around a surgical mask are reduced compared to no mask wearing, with the magnitude of reduction dependent on the direction of escape (out the top, the sides, or the bottom). Because the actual leakage flowrate in each direction is difficult to measure, we use a Monte Carlo approach to estimate flow-corrected particle emission rates for particles having diameters in the range 0.5-20 μm. in all orientations. From these, we derive a flow-weighted overall number-based particle removal efficiency for the mask. The overall mask efficiency, accounting both for air that passes through the mask and for leakage flows, is reduced compared to the through-mask filtration efficiency, from 93 to 70% for talking, but from only 94-90% for coughing. These results demonstrate that leakage flows due to imperfect sealing do decrease mask efficiencies for reducing emission of expiratory particles, but even with such leakage surgical masks provide substantial control.

Factors associated to the practice of using masks by the population of Paraíba during the COVID-19 pandemic

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the practice of using masks by the population of the Brazilian state of Paraíba during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHOD

Cross-sectional, descriptive-analytical study conducted with adults living in the state of Paraíba through an online instrument from April to May 2020, through the Face Mask Use Scale of Faculdades Metropolitanas Unidas da Paraíba.

RESULTS

The participants amounted to 1,307 (100.0%) individuals, who were predominantly female (78.0%), aged 35 to 45 (32.3%), married (53.3%) and post-graduates (46.9%). The mean score for the practice of using masks was 18.7 (SD = 8.0; minimum 6.00; maximum 30). The use of masks for self-protection scored 9.8 (DP = 3.9; minimum 3.0; maximum 15.0), whereas the score for protection of others was 8.9 (SD = 4.5; minimum 3.0; maximum 15.0). In the comparison between the scores of the practice of using masks, there was a significant statistical difference for gender, education, age group, and income (p ≤ 0.01). The practice of using masks was more frequent in health environments, 7.3 (DP = 3.2).

CONCLUSION

The practice of using masks was predominant among women, people over 35, married, with an income higher than seven minimum wages, and post-graduation. The use of masks for self-protection was higher than for the protection of others and its use in health environments was higher than in the others.

Effectivity of a Program for the Control and Prevention of COVID-19 Healthcare-Associated Infections in a Spanish Academic Hospital

BACKGROUND

Although recommendations to prevent COVID-19 healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) have been proposed, data on their effectivity are currently limited.

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to evaluate the effectivity of a program of control and prevention of COVID-19 in an academic general hospital in Spain.

METHODS

We captured the number of COVID-19 cases and the type of contact that occurred in hospitalized patients and healthcare personnel (HCP). To evaluate the impact of the continuous use of a surgical mask among HCP, the number of patients with COVID-19 HAIs and accumulated incidence of HCP with COVID-19 was compared between the preintervention and intervention periods.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty-two patients with COVID-19 have been admitted to the hospital. Seven of them had an HAI origin (6 in the preintervention period and 1 in the intervention period). One hundred forty-two HCP were infected with SARS-CoV-2. Of them, 22 (15.5%) were attributed to healthcare (2 in the emergency department and none in the critical care departments), and 120 (84.5%) were attributed to social relations in the workplace or during their non-work-related personal interactions. The accumulated incidence during the preintervention period was 22.3 for every 1000 HCP and 8.2 for every 1000 HCP during the intervention period. The relative risk was 0.37 (95% confidence interval, 0.25 to 0.55) and the attributable risk was -0.014 (95% confidence interval, -0.020 to -0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

A program of control and prevention of HAIs complemented with the recommendation for the continuous use of a surgical mask in the workplace and social environments of HCP effectively decreased the risk of COVID-19 HAIs in admitted patients and HCP.

Wearing masks to reduce the spread of respiratory viruses: a systematic evidence mapping

Since the outbreak of coronavirus disease in 2019, the controversy over the effectiveness, safety, and enforceability of masks used by the public has been prominent. This study aims to identify, describe, and organize the currently available high-quality design evidence concerning mask use during the spread of respiratory viruses and find evidence gaps. Databases including PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, EMBASE, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), clinical trial registry, gray literature database, and reference lists of articles were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews (SRs) in April 2020. The quality of the studies was assessed using the risk of bias tool recommended by the Cochrane Handbook Version 5.1.0 and the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR 2) tool. A bubble plot was designed to display information in four dimensions. Finally, twenty-one RCTs and nine SRs met our inclusion criteria. Most studies were of "Low quality" and focused on healthcare workers. Six RCTs reported adverse effects, with one implying that the cloth masks reuse may increase the infection risk. When comparing masks with usual practice, over 70% RCTs and also SRs showed that masks were "beneficial" or "probably beneficial"; however, when comparing N95 respirators with medical masks, 75% of SRs showed "no effect", whereas 50% of RCTs showed "beneficial effect". Overall, the current evidence provided by high-quality designs may be insufficient to deal with a second impact of the pandemic. Masks may be effective in interrupting or reducing the spread of respiratory viruses; however, the effect of an N95 respirator or cloth masks versus medical masks is unclear. Additional high-quality studies determining the impact of prolonged mask use on vulnerable populations (such as children and pregnant women), the possible adverse effects (such as skin allergies and shortness of breath) and optimal settings and exposure circumstances for populations to use masks are needed.

Influenza Virus Infection and Transplantation

Influenza infection poses significant risk for solid organ transplant recipients who often experience more severe infection with increased rates of complications, including those relating to the allograft. Although symptoms of influenza experienced by transplant recipients are similar to that of the general population, fever is not a ubiquitous symptom and lymphopenia is common. Annual inactivated influenza vaccine is recommended for all transplant recipients. Newer strategies such as using a higher dose vaccine or multiple doses in the same season appear to provide greater immunogenicity. Neuraminidase inhibitors are the mainstay of treatment and chemoprophylaxis although resistance may occur in the transplant setting. Influenza therapeutics are advancing, including the recent licensure of baloxavir; however, many remain to be evaluated in transplant recipients and are not yet in routine clinical use. Further population-based studies spanning multiple influenza seasons are needed to enhance our understanding of influenza epidemiology in solid organ transplant recipients. Specific assessment of newer influenza therapeutics in transplant recipients and refinement of prevention strategies are vital to reducing morbidity and mortality.

Decrease of respiratory diseases in one social children welfare institute in Shanxi Province during COVID-19

Background

To assess the impact of disinfection measures on the incidence of common diseases in children welfare institute during the epidemic of Corona Virus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), and provide a basis for the daily disinfection management of children welfare institute.

Methods

This study surveyed and analyzed common diseases among children under the age of 14 in one social children welfare institute in Shanxi Province from January to May in 2018–2020 by the year-on-year method.

Results

The prevalence rate of respiratory diseases in 2020 was a significantly negative growth compared with 2018 and 2019. There was no obvious pattern of changes in digestive diseases group.

Conclusion

In view of the above anti-epidemic measures, it indicates that the children gathering institutions should strengthen effective personal protection and public health management to reduce infectious disease among children.

Nonpharmacological interventions to reduce respiratory viral transmission: an evidence-based review with recommendations

BACKGROUND

Viral respiratory infections are a leading cause of worldwide mortality and exert the potential to cause global socioeconomic crises. However, inexpensive, efficacious, and rapidly deployable strategies to reduce viral transmission are increasingly important in the setting of an ongoing pandemic, though not entirely understood. This article provides a comprehensive review of commonly employed nonpharmacological interventions to interrupt viral spread and provides evidence-based recommendations for their use.

METHODOLOGY

A systematic review of three databases was performed. Studies with defined endpoints of subjects receiving one of five interventions (nasal washing, gargling, personal protective equipment (PPE), social distancing, and hand hygiene) were included. An evidence-based review of the highest level of evidence, with recommendations, was created in accordance with a previously described, rigorous, iterative process.

RESULTS

Fifty-four primary studies were included. The most commonly studied intervention was hand hygiene, followed by PPE, gargling, saline nasal washing, and social distancing.

CONCLUSIONS

Mask use and hand hygiene are strong recommendations for prevention of viral transmission. Donning gloves, gowns, and eye protection are a recommendation in healthcare settings. Saline nasal washing and gargling are options in selected populations. Although an aggregate level of evidence is not provided, the authors recommend social distancing.

Cost-effectiveness of surgical mask, N-95 respirator, hand-hygiene and surgical mask with hand hygiene in the prevention of COVID-19: Cost effectiveness analysis from Indian context

INTRODUCTION

In the absence of specific treatment, preventive strategies are of paramount importance in management of coronavirus disease 2019(COVID-19) pandemic. We estimated cost-effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions such as hand-hygiene, surgical-mask N-95 respirators and surgical mask in general population.

METHODS

We performed a decision tree and markov-model based economic evaluation. We estimated total costs and outcomes from public payer's perspective, based on information available through systematic literature search on relative intervention effect during early pandemic phase. We estimated outcomes as number COVID-19 prevented and Quality Adjusted life year (QALY) over one-year time-horizon with one-day cycle-length. Incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICER) was calculated multiple sensitivity analyses were applied to assess parameter uncertainty.

RESULTS

Use of surgical mask with hand hygiene, fit tested N-95 respirator, surgical-mask, non-fit tested N-95 and hand-hygiene interventions prevented additional 1139, 1124, 1121, 1043 and 975 COVID-19 cases per-million as compared to using none. Additional costs incurred (in billion) were ₹29.78 ($0.40), ₹148.09 ($1.99), ₹72.51 ($0.98), ₹26.84 ($0.36) and ₹2.48 ($0.03) as well as additional QALYs gained were 357.4, 353.01, 327.95, 351.52 and 307.04 for surgical mask with hand hygiene, fit-tested N-95, non-fit-tested N-95, surgical mask and hand-hygiene respectively. ICERs with surgical with hand hygiene, hand-hygiene alone, surgical-mask alone, N-95 respirator fit and non-fit test were 83.32($1.12), 8.07($0.11), 76.36($1.03), 419.51($5.65) and 221.10 ($2.98) million ₹ ($)/QALY respectively. Results were robust on uncertainty analysis.

DISCUSSION

Among the non-pharmacological interventions to be considered for preventing spread of COVID-19, hand hygiene was cost-effective and avoidance of use of surgical masks and respirators by the general public could save resources.

Facemask use in community settings to prevent respiratory infection transmission: A rapid review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Synthesis of the available evidence on the effectiveness of medical and cloth facemask use by the general public in community settings is required to learn lessons for future respiratory epidemics/pandemics.

METHOD

Search terms relating to facemasks, infection and community settings were used for PubMed, the Cochrane Library Database and Google Scholar. A meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

The review included 12 primary studies on the effectiveness of medical facemask use to prevent influenza, influenza-like illness, SARS-CoV, and SARS-CoV-2 transmission. The meta-analysis demonstrated that facemask use significantly reduces the risk of transmitting these respiratory infections (pooled OR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.54-0.81). Of the 12 studies, 10 clinical trials suggested that respiratory infection incidence is lower with high medical facemask compliance, early use and use in combination with intensive hand hygiene. One cohort study conducted during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic demonstrated that facemasks are effective in reducing SARS-CoV-2 transmission when used before those who are infected develop symptoms. One case-control study reported that controls used medical facemasks more often than cases infected with SARS-CoV (p <  0.05). No primary study on cloth facemask effectiveness to prevent respiratory infection transmission was found.

CONCLUSION

Based on the available evidence, medical facemask use by healthy and sick individuals is recommended for preventing respiratory infection transmission in community settings. Medical facemask effectiveness is dependent on compliance and utilization in combination with preventive measures such as intensive hand hygiene. No direct evidence is currently available in humans supporting the recommendation of cloth facemask use to prevent respiratory infection transmission.

The SARS-CoV-2-Inactivating Activity of Hydroxytyrosol-Rich Aqueous Olive Pulp Extract (HIDROX®) and Its Use as a Virucidal Cream for Topical Application

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has spread globally. Although measures to control SARS-CoV-2, namely, vaccination, medication, and chemical disinfectants are being investigated, there is an increase in the demand for auxiliary antiviral approaches using natural compounds. Here we have focused on hydroxytyrosol (HT)-rich aqueous olive pulp extract (HIDROX^®) and evaluated its SARS-CoV-2-inactivating activity in vitro. We showed that the HIDROX solution exhibits time- and concentration-dependent SARS-CoV-2-inactivating activities, and that HIDROX has more potent virucidal activity than pure HT. The evaluation of the mechanism of action suggested that both HIDROX and HT induced structural changes in SARS-CoV-2, which changed the molecular weight of the spike proteins. Even though the spike protein is highly glycosylated, this change was induced regardless of the glycosylation status. In addition, HIDROX or HT treatment disrupted the viral genome. Moreover, the HIDROX-containing cream applied on film showed time- and concentration-dependent SARS-CoV-2-inactivating activities. Thus, the HIDROX-containing cream can be applied topically as an antiviral hand cream. Our findings suggest that HIDROX contributes to improving SARS-CoV-2 control measures.

Face Mask Use in the Community for Reducing the Spread of COVID-19: A Systematic Review

Background: Evidence is needed on the effectiveness of wearing face masks in the community to prevent SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and effectiveness of face mask use in a community setting and to predict the effectiveness of wearing a mask. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCISEARCH, The Cochrane Library, and pre-prints from inception to 22 April 2020 without restriction by language. We rated the certainty of evidence according to Cochrane and GRADE approach. Findings: Our search identified 35 studies, including three randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (4,017 patients), 10 comparative studies (18,984 patients), 13 predictive models, nine laboratory experimental studies. For reducing infection rates, the estimates of cluster-RCTs were in favor of wearing face masks vs. no mask, but not at statistically significant levels (adjusted OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.78-1.05). Similar findings were reported in observational studies. Mathematical models indicated an important decrease in mortality when the population mask coverage is near-universal, regardless of mask efficacy. In the best-case scenario, when the mask efficacy is at 95%, the R0 can fall to 0.99 from an initial value of 16.90. Levels of mask filtration efficiency were heterogeneous, depending on the materials used (surgical mask: 45-97%). One laboratory study suggested a viral load reduction of 0.25 (95% CI 0.09-0.67) in favor of mask vs. no mask. Interpretation: The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis support the use of face masks in a community setting. Robust randomized trials on face mask effectiveness are needed to inform evidence-based policies. PROSPERO registration: CRD42020184963.

The pandemic of COVID-19 and its implications for the purity and authenticity of alcohol-based hand sanitizers: The health risks associated with falsified sanitizers and recommendations for regulatory and public health bodies

With the beginning of the pandemic of COVID-19 throughout the world, the demand and consumption of hand sanitizers has increased, which had led to a sharp crunch in these products at all levels. This shortage has led to an increase in the prevalence of falsified alcohol-based hand sanitizers, including the illegal addition of methanol to hand sanitizers and the production of hand sanitizers with an alcohol concentration of less than 60%. These findings indicate that regulatory and public health bodies should take an active role in ensuring the safety and quality of antimicrobial products such as alcohol-based hand sanitizers at every stage of the products' lifecycle, including distribution, manufacture and import.

May the analysis of 1918 influenza pandemic give hints to imagine the possible magnitude of Corona Virus Disease-2019 (COVID-19)?

BACKGROUND

In 1918 an unknown infectious agent spread around the world infecting over one-third of the general population and killing almost 50 million people. Many countries were at war, the First World War. Since Spain was a neutral country and Spanish press could report about the infection without censorship, this condition is commonly remembered as "Spanish influenza". This review examines several aspects during the 1918 influenza pandemic to bring out evidences which might be useful to imagine the possible magnitude of the present coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).

METHODS

In the first part of this review we will examine the origin of the SARS-Coronavirus-2 and 1918 Spanish Influenza Virus and the role played by host and environment in its diffusion. We will also include in our analysis an evaluation of different approaches utilized to restrain the spread of pandemic and to treat infected patients. In the second part, we will try to imagine the magnitude of the present COVID-19 pandemic and the possible measures able to restrain in the present environment its spread.

RESULTS

Several factors characterize the outcome in a viral pandemic infection. They include the complete knowledge of the virus, the complete knowledge of the host and of the environment where the host lives and the pandemic develops.

CONCLUSION

By comparing the situation seen in 1918 with the current one, we are now in a more favourable position. The experience of the past teaches us that their success is linked to a rapid, constant and lasting application. Then, rather than coercion, awareness of the need to observe such prevention measures works better.

Narrative review of non-pharmaceutical behavioural measures for the prevention of COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) based on the Health-EDRM framework

INTRODUCTION

Non-pharmaceutical measures to facilitate a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, a disease caused by novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, are urgently needed. Using the World Health Organization (WHO) health emergency and disaster risk management (health-EDRM) framework, behavioural measures for droplet-borne communicable diseases and their enabling and limiting factors at various implementation levels were evaluated.

SOURCES OF DATA

Keyword search was conducted in PubMed, Google Scholar, Embase, Medline, Science Direct, WHO and CDC online publication databases. Using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine review criteria, 10 bottom-up, non-pharmaceutical prevention measures from 104 English-language articles, which published between January 2000 and May 2020, were identified and examined.

AREAS OF AGREEMENT

Evidence-guided behavioural measures against transmission of COVID-19 in global at-risk communities were identified, including regular handwashing, wearing face masks and avoiding crowds and gatherings.

AREAS OF CONCERN

Strong evidence-based systematic behavioural studies for COVID-19 prevention are lacking.

GROWING POINTS

Very limited research publications are available for non-pharmaceutical measures to facilitate pandemic response.

AREAS TIMELY FOR RESEARCH

Research with strong implementation feasibility that targets resource-poor settings with low baseline health-EDRM capacity is urgently needed.