Incidence and recall of influenza in a cohort of Glasgow healthcare workers during the 1993-4 epidemic: results of serum testing and questionnaire

The role of asymptomatic infections in influenza transmission: what do we really know

Before the COVID-19 pandemic, the role of asymptomatic influenza virus infections in influenza transmission was uncertain. However, the importance of asymptomatic infection with SARS-CoV-2 for onward transmission of COVID-19 has led experts to question whether the role of asymptomatic influenza virus infections in transmission had been underappreciated. We discuss the existing evidence on the frequency of asymptomatic influenza virus infections, the extent to which they contribute to infection transmission, and remaining knowledge gaps. We propose priority areas for further evaluation, study designs, and case definitions to address existing knowledge gaps.

Influenza vaccination from the perspective of health care workers at university hospitals

BACKGROUND

The influenza vaccination rate of healthcare workers (HWs) in Poland is low. Before implementing methods for promoting influenza vaccination, it is crucial to identify attitudes towards vaccination. We aimed to examine the knowledge and attitudes towards influenza vaccination of HWs at university hospitals. Moreover, we evaluated the incentives for getting influenza vaccination among HWs.

METHODS

From September 2020 to October 2020, we surveyed HWs in one children's hospital and two adults' hospitals in Warsaw (Poland). We included only fully and correctly completed surveys into final analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 950 questionnaires (85% women, 45% <40 years old, 33% physicians and 48% nurses, 56% working in a children's hospital) were evaluated. Of all HWs, 25% declared they were vaccinated and 54% planned to get vaccinated in the next season. We have analyzed attitudes towards influenza vaccination and motivations to get vaccinated.

CONCLUSIONS

Among HWs in academic hospitals, males, people <40 years old, physicians and those working in children's hospital are more likely to get vaccinated and their attitudes towards influenza vaccination are more positive. Of those less likely to get vaccinated, people >40 years old and nurses could be effectively persuaded by free and on-site influenza vaccination. Moreover, free access to vaccination is the strongest motivator for vaccination among all HWs. The attitudes towards mandatory influenza vaccination differ sharply among HWs-while physicians are ready to accept it, nurses are not.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04569019.

Sustained Increase in Very Low Influenza Vaccination Coverage in Residents and Healthcare Workers of Long-Term Care Facilities in Austria after Educational Interventions

Residents of long-term care facilities (LTCFs) are particularly at risk for influenza infections. We aimed to improve influenza vaccination coverage among residents and healthcare workers (HCWs) in four LTCFs by implementing educational programs and enhanced vaccination services. We compared vaccination coverage before and after the interventions (2017/18 and 2018/19 seasons). Data on vaccination adherence were recorded during a four-year observational period (2019/20 to 2022/23 seasons). Following the interventions, vaccination coverage increased significantly from 5.8% (22/377) to 19.1% (71/371) in residents and from 1.3% (3/234) to 19.7% (46/233) in HCWs (p < 0.001). During the observational period (2019/20 to 2022/23 seasons), vaccination coverage remained high in residents but decreased in HCWs. Vaccination adherence was significantly higher in residents and HCWs in LTCF 1 compared to the other three LTCFs. Our study suggests that a bundle of educational interventions and enhanced vaccination services can be an effective method for improving influenza vaccination coverage in LTCFs in both residents and HCWs. However, vaccination rates are still well below the recommended targets and further efforts are needed to increase vaccine coverage in our LTCFs.

Real-world impact of vaccination on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) incidence in healthcare personnel at an academic medical center

OBJECTIVE

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination effectiveness in healthcare personnel (HCP) has been established. However, questions remain regarding its performance in high-risk healthcare occupations and work locations. We describe the effect of a COVID-19 HCP vaccination campaign on SARS-CoV-2 infection by timing of vaccination, job type, and work location.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of COVID-19 vaccination acceptance, incidence of postvaccination COVID-19, hospitalization, and mortality among 16,156 faculty, students, and staff at a large academic medical center. Data were collected 8 weeks prior to the start of phase 1a vaccination of frontline employees and ended 11 weeks after campaign onset.

RESULTS

The COVID-19 incidence rate among HCP at our institution decreased from 3.2% during the 8 weeks prior to the start of vaccinations to 0.38% by 4 weeks after campaign initiation. COVID-19 risk was reduced among individuals who received a single vaccination (hazard ratio [HR], 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40-0.68; P < .0001) and was further reduced with 2 doses of vaccine (HR, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.09-0.32; P < .0001). By 2 weeks after the second dose, the observed case positivity rate was 0.04%. Among phase 1a HCP, we observed a lower risk of COVID-19 among physicians and a trend toward higher risk for respiratory therapists independent of vaccination status. Rates of infection were similar in a subgroup of nurses when examined by work location.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings show the real-world effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in HCP. Despite these encouraging results, unvaccinated HCP remain at an elevated risk of infection, highlighting the need for targeted outreach to combat vaccine hesitancy.

Seasonal influenza vaccination of healthcare workers: a narrative review

Influenza is an acute respiratory disease caused by the influenza virus which often occurs in outbreaks and epidemics worldwide. The World Health Organization recommends annual vaccination of healthcare workers (HCWs) against influenza, because most of them are involved in the direct care of patients with a high risk of influenza-related complications. Given the significance of the disease burden, a targeted literature review was conducted to assess issues related to influenza vaccination among HCWs. The primary aim of this review was to assess the incidence of influenza among medical personnel and healthcare-associated influenza, and to outline the benefits of influenza vaccination for patients and HCWs themselves. Vaccination of HCWs seems to be an important strategy for reducing the transmission of influenza from healthcare personnel to their patients and, therefore, for reducing patient morbidity and mortality, increasing patient safety, and reducing work absenteeism among HCWs. The benefits of influenza vaccination for their patients and for HCWs themselves are addressed in literature, but the evidence is mixed and often of low-quality. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2022;35(2):127-39.

Incidence of Influenza Virus Infection among Wroclaw's Healthcare Workers in Pre-COVID-19 2019-2020 Influenza Season Using Novel Flu SensDx Device

Background: Healthcare workers (HCWs) are more exposed to influenza infection, and the influenza vaccination is recommended each year, to reduce the risk of influenza infection and prevent influenza transmission. This study is a cross-sectional study and the objectives were to determine the rate of influenza virus infection among HCWs in the 2019−2020 influenza season. Methods: Between January and March 2020, a survey was carried out in 2 hospitals and 15 primary health-care settings (PHCS) in Wroclaw (Poland). The novel point-of-care testing Flu SensDx device was used, which detects the M1 protein of the influenza virus using electrochemical impedance spectroscopy from biological material (throat/nasal swabs). Results: A total of 150 samples were collected. The majority of participating HCWs by profession were 83 physicians (55.3%) and half (51.3%) of the participating HCWs worked in PHCS. Influenza vaccination coverage was 61.3% in 2019−2020 and 46.0% in the 2018−2019 season for all participants. Of the participating HCWs, 44.0% were positive tested by the Flu SensDx device. There were no statistically significant differences among the positive tested HCWs, their influenza immunization history, and the presence of symptoms of influenza-like illness (p > 0.05). Conclusion: Although the results of the present study suggest that influenza vaccination does not reduce the frequency of influenza virus detection by Flu SensDx testing in the HCWs participants, larger studies are needed to estimate the incidence of influenza virus infection among HCWs to understand the underlying mechanism and fine-tune policies aimed at reducing nosocomial infections.

Estimated Cost Effectiveness of Influenza Vaccination for Emergency Medical Services Professionals

INTRODUCTION

Because of their frequent contact with compromised patients, vaccination against influenza is recommended for all healthcare workers. Recent studies suggest that vaccination decreases influenza transmission to patients and reduces worker illness and absenteeism. However, few emergency medical services (EMS) agencies provide annual vaccination, and the vaccination rate among EMS personnel remains low. Reticence among EMS agencies to provide influenza vaccination to their employees may be due in part to the unknown fiscal consequences of implementing a vaccination program. In this study, we sought to estimate the cost effectiveness of an employer-provided influenza vaccination program for EMS personnel.

METHODS

Using data from published reports on influenza vaccination, we developed a cost-effectiveness model of vaccination for a hypothesized EMS system of 100 employees. Model inputs included vaccination costs, vaccination rate, infection rate, costs associated with absenteeism, lost productivity due to working while ill (presenteeism), and medical care for treating illness. To assess the robustness of the model we performed a series of sensitivity analyses on the input variables.

RESULTS

The proportion of employees contracting influenza or influenza-like illness (ILI) was estimated at 19% among vaccinated employees compared to 26% among non-vaccinated employees. The costs of the vaccine, consumables, and employee time for vaccination totaled $44.19 per vaccinated employee, with a total system cost of $4,419. Compared to no vaccination, a mandatory vaccination program would save $20,745 in lost productivity and medical costs, or $16,325 in net savings after accounting for vaccination costs. The savings were 3.7 times the cost of the vaccination program and were derived from avoided absenteeism ($7,988), avoided presenteeism productivity losses ($10,303), and avoided medical costs of treating employees with influenza/ILI ($2,454). Through sensitivity analyses the model was verified to be robust across a wide range of input variable assumptions. The net monetary benefits were positive across all ranges of input assumptions, but cost savings were most sensitive to the vaccination uptake rate, ILI rate, and presenteeism productivity losses.

CONCLUSION

This cost-effectiveness analysis suggests that an employer-provided influenza vaccination program is a financially favorable strategy for reducing costs associated with influenza/ILI employee absenteeism, presenteeism, and medical care.

Incidence of Asymptomatic and Symptomatic Influenza Among Healthcare Workers: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Influenza is an important cause of viral hospital-acquired infection involving patients, healthcare workers (HCW), and visitors. The frequency of asymptomatic influenza among HCW with possible subsequent transmission is poorly described. The objective is to determine the cumulative incidence of asymptomatic, paucisymptomatic, and symptomatic influenza among HCW.

METHOD

A multicenter prospective cohort study was done in 5 French university hospitals, including 289 HCW during the 2016-2017 influenza season. HCW had 3 physical examinations (time [T] 0, before epidemic onset; T.1, before epidemic peak; T.2, T.3, after epidemic peak). A blood sample was taken each time for influenza serology and a nasal swab was collected at T1 and T2 for influenza detection by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Positive influenza was defined as either a positive influenza PCR, and/or virus-specific seroconversion against influenza A, the only circulating virus, with no vaccination record during follow-up. Symptoms were self-reported daily between T1 and T2. Cumulative incidence of influenza was stratified by clinical presentation per 100 HCW.

RESULTS

Of the 289 HCW included, 278 (96%) completed the entire follow-up. Overall, 62 HCW had evidence of influenza of whom 46.8% were asymptomatic, 41.9% were paucisymptomatic, and 11.3% were symptomatic. Cumulative influenza incidence was 22.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 17.4%-27.2%). Cumulative incidence of asymptomatic influenza was 5.8% (95% CI: 3.3%-9.2%), 13.7% (95% CI: 9.9%-18.2%) for paucisymptomatic influenza, and 2.9% (95% CI: 1.3%-5.5%) for symptomatic influenza.

CONCLUSIONS

Asymptomatic and paucisymptomatic influenza were frequent among HCW, representing 47% and 42% of the influenza burden, respectively. These findings highlight the importance of systematic implementation of infection control measures among HCW regardless of respiratory symptoms from preventing nosocomial transmission of influenza.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

NCT02868658.

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.

Hand hygiene and facemask use to prevent droplet-transmitted viral diseases during air travel: a systematic literature review

Background

Transmission of viral diseases (e.g., influenza A H1N1) via respiratory droplets takes place mainly in confined spaces, including in aircraft during commercial air travel. The adoption of hygiene measures may help to prevent disease spread aboard aircraft. This review summarizes the evidence on hand hygiene and the use of facemasks as viral disease prevention measures in aircraft.

Methods

A literature search was performed in the PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases up to 10 June 2020, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria. A population, intervention, comparison, outcomes, and study design (PICOS) approach was used to define the review question.

Results

We included four studies published between 2007 and 2020, all targeting influenza virus disease, in the qualitative synthesis. Three studies used mathematical models to simulate single- or multiple-direction flights, and two of them showed that facemask (e.g., N95 respirator) use considerably reduced infection probability. In the third study, hand cleaning by 20 to 60% of people at any time in all airports (including on aircraft) reduced the measure of airports’ power to spread the disease across the globe by ~ 24 to 69%. The fourth study was a case-control study designed to trace an influenza outbreak in two flights during the 2009 influenza A H1N1 pandemic. The study showed that none (0%) of nine infected passengers compared to 15 (47%) of 32 healthy control passengers in the aircraft cabin during one of these flights wore a facemask (odds ratio, 0.0; 95% confidence interval, 0.0–0.7). In contrast, both case and control passengers appeared to be equally compliant in self-assessed hand hygiene.

Conclusions

Facemask use combined with hand hygiene may minimize the chance of droplet-transmitted virus spread by air travelers. Thus, it is necessary that hygiene measures become an integral part of standard procedures in commercial air travel.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12889-021-10814-9.

Promotion of the influenza vaccination to hospital staff during pre-employment health check: a prospective, randomised, controlled trial

Background

Vaccination is the most effective prevention of seasonal influenza. Despite its recommendation and active promotion, vaccination coverage remains low among healthcare staff. The goal of the study was to test if a pre-employment health check is a good opportunity to promote future vaccination against influenza among healthcare workers newly hired by a university hospital.

Methods

All new hospital employees active at the bedside who underwent a pre-employment health check between the end of 2016’s influenza epidemic and the start of the next influenza vaccination campaign were randomly allocated to a control group or an intervention group. The intervention consisted of a semi-structured dialog and the release of an information leaflet about influenza and influenza vaccination during the check-up, and the shipment of a postcard reminder 2 weeks before the next vaccination campaign. Vaccination rates during the campaign were compared among the two groups.

Results

Three hundred fifty-seven employees were included. Vaccination rates were similar in both groups: 79/172 (46%) in the control and 92/185 (50%) in the intervention group. A significantly higher rate of vaccination was noted among physicians (70/117, 60%) than among other employees (101/240, 42%, p = 0.001). In a pre-defined exploratory analysis among physicians, the vaccination rate was higher in the intervention group (36/51, 71%) than in the control group (34/65, 52%, p = 0.046).

Conclusions

Promotion of the influenza vaccine during pre-employment health check did not improve the vaccination rate of newly hired hospital healthcare workers overall during the next influenza vaccination campaign. Results suggest a favourable impact on the vaccination rate of physicians. Thus, there may be an interest in using communication strategies tailored to the different categories of healthcare workers to promote the influenza vaccine during pre-employment health check.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials, NCT02758145. Registered 26 April 2016.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12995-020-00285-w.

The COVID-19 pandemic, personal protective equipment and respirator: A narrative review

INTRODUCTION

The coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic has touched almost every continent. Personal protective equipment (PPE) is the final line of protection of healthcare workers (HCW). There is variation as well as controversy of infection control recommendation with regards to the use of PPE for HCW between institutions. The aim of this narrative review is to of examine and summarise the available evidence to guide recommendation for the safety of HCW.

METHOD

A literature search was conducted on the PubMed, MedLine and Embase databases with the keywords "personal protective equipment," "COVID 19," "n95," "health care worker" and "mortality."

RESULTS

SARS-nCoV-2 is highly contagious. About 3.5%-20% of HCW has been reported to be infected. The mortality ranges from 0.53% to 1.94%. PPE is part of the measure within a package of prevention and control of pandemic, rather than a replacement of. Respirators are more effective than masks in preventing aerosol transmission to HCWs. Extended use may be considered if guidelines are adhered. Powered air-purifying respirators if available should be used in high-risk procedures.

CONCLUSION

Transmission of viruses is multimodal and in the setting of a novel pathogen with high case fatality with no proven effective interventions, PPE that affords the best protection should be available to HCWs.

Infection prevention and control measures in practices of the Swiss sentinel network during seasonal influenza epidemics

Background

There are limited data on the transmission of influenza in the context of primary care practices, despite the fact that a significant proportion of the population consult their primary care physician for an influenza-like illness every year.

Aim

To describe the use of influenza prevention and control methods in private practices of the Swiss sentinel network.

Methods

This online cross-sectional survey collected data about infection prevention and control measures in the 166 private practices of the Swiss sentinel surveillance network during the 2018–2019 influenza season. Questions pertained to the practice setting, infection prevention and control recommendations, influenza vaccination status of the physicians and their staff, adhesion to hand hygiene, and mask wearing.

Findings

Among the 122 practices that answered (response rate 73.5%), 90.2% of the responding physicians had been vaccinated themselves, and 46.7% (56/120) estimated that their staff vaccination coverage was >60%, although it was offered to employees in all practices. Most practices (N=68, 55.7%) had no specific recommendations for their staff concerning mask wearing. Most physicians reported washing or disinfecting their hands before examining a patient (N=91, 74.6%), after examination (N=110, 90.2%) and before a medical procedure (N=112, 91.8%). However, this rate was lower for arrival at the practice (N=78, 63.9%) and leaving the practice (N=83, 68.0%).

Conclusion

Most physicians in the Swiss sentinel surveillance network have been vaccinated themselves. However, the vaccination rates among their staff are low, despite vaccine availability. Hand hygiene measures were also suboptimal. These results warrant further efforts to implement infection prevention and control measures in the ambulatory setting.

Absences from work among healthcare workers: are they related to influenza shot adherence?

Background

The coverage for influenza vaccination among healthcare workers (HCWs) is inadequate in many countries despite strong recommendations; is there evidence that influenza vaccination is effective in preventing absenteeism? Aim of the study is to evaluate the influenza vaccination coverage and its effects on absences from work among HCWs of an Italian academic healthcare trust during the 2017–2018 influenza season.

Methods

We performed a retrospective study to identify predictive characteristics for vaccination, and a retrospective cohort study to establish the effect of vaccination on absences among the vaccinated and non-vaccinated cohorts between December 2017 and May 2018. Overall absence rates over the whole observation period and sub-rates over 14-days intervals were calculated; then comparison between the two groups were conducted applying Chi-square test.

Results

Influenza vaccination coverage among 4419 HCWs was 14.5%. Age, university degree, medical care area and physician profile were positively associated with vaccine uptake. Globally during influenza season non-vaccinated HCWs lost 2.47/100 person-days of work compared to 1.92/100 person-days of work among vaccinated HCWs (p < 0.001); significant differences in absences rates resulted when focusing on the influenza epidemic peak.

Conclusions

Factors predicting influenza uptake among HCWs were male sex, working within medical care area and being a physician. Absenteeism among HCWs resulted to be negatively correlated with vaccination against influenza. These findings add evidence to the urgent need to implement better influenza vaccination strategies towards HCWs to tackle vaccine hesitancy among professionals.

Self-reported immunity and opinions on vaccination of hospital personnel among paediatric healthcare workers in Denmark

•

Vaccination of healthcare workers prevents the spread of infections in hospitals.

•

A forth of healthcare workers reported to be non-immune to vaccine-preventable diseases.

•

Nine out of 10 employees supported vaccination of non-immune healthcare workers.

•

National recommendations for vaccination of healthcare workers in Denmark are needed.

Background

Denmark has no general recommendations for vaccination of healthcare workers (HCWs). We explored the self-reported immunity to varicella, measles, mumps, and rubella, reasons for receiving the influenza vaccine or not, and opinions on vaccination of HCWs against varicella, MMR, pertussis, diphtheria, and influenza among staff from departments with a high risk of exposure to infectious agents.

Methods

From May 2019 to August 2019, a structured questionnaire was distributed to clinical and non-clinical HCWs at a tertiary and a general paediatric department in Denmark. Self-reported immunity was defined as either previous infection or vaccination against the disease.

Results

Of 619 employed HCWs, 555 (90%) were included. A large proportion were unsure of or denied previous vaccination or infection with measles (20.1%), mumps (30.2%), rubella (21.4%), varicella (12.1%), pertussis (44.1%), and diphtheria (32.1%). Non-clinical personnel and employees born in 1974–1983 had the lowest level of self-reported immunity. Mandatory vaccination of non-immune HCWs was approved by 54–68.9% of participants, and any kind of vaccination (mandatory or as an offer at hospitals) was approved of up to 95.3% of all participants depending on the disease. During the season 2018/19, 214 (38.6%) HCWs received the influenza vaccine, including 20.3% of non-clinical staff, 34.8% of nurses and 56.5% of doctors (P < 0.001). Reasons for lack of vaccine uptake were mainly employees considering themselves rarely sick, the vaccine was not regarded as necessary, forgetfulness or lack of time. Only 37.8% was in favour of mandatory influenza vaccination.

Conclusions

A large proportion of paediatric HCWs were not aware of their immune status against important vaccine-preventable diseases. >90% supported vaccination of HCWs, with two out of three supporting mandatory MMR, pertussis and diphtheria vaccination. Better information and an official immunisation policy of non-immune HCWs in Denmark is warranted.

A rapid systematic review of the efficacy of face masks and respirators against coronaviruses and other respiratory transmissible viruses for the community, healthcare workers and sick patients

Background

The pandemic of COVID-19 is growing, and a shortage of masks and respirators has been reported globally. Policies of health organizations for healthcare workers are inconsistent, with a change in policy in the US for universal face mask use. The aim of this study was to review the evidence around the efficacy of masks and respirators for healthcare workers, sick patients and the general public.

Methods

A systematic review of randomized controlled clinical trials on use of respiratory protection by healthcare workers, sick patients and community members was conducted. Articles were searched on Medline and Embase using key search terms.

Results

A total of 19 randomised controlled trials were included in this study – 8 in community settings, 6 in healthcare settings and 5 as source control. Most of these randomised controlled trials used different interventions and outcome measures. In the community, masks appeared to be effective with and without hand hygiene, and both together are more protective. Randomised controlled trials in health care workers showed that respirators, if worn continually during a shift, were effective but not if worn intermittently. Medical masks were not effective, and cloth masks even less effective. When used by sick patients randomised controlled trials suggested protection of well contacts.

Conclusion

The study suggests that community mask use by well people could be beneficial, particularly for COVID-19, where transmission may be pre-symptomatic. The studies of masks as source control also suggest a benefit, and may be important during the COVID-19 pandemic in universal community face mask use as well as in health care settings. Trials in healthcare workers support the use of respirators continuously during a shift. This may prevent health worker infections and deaths from COVID-19, as aerosolisation in the hospital setting has been documented.

Barriers to seasonal influenza vaccine uptake among health care workers in long-term care facilities: A cross-sectional analysis

Objectives The vaccination of health care workers (HCWs) against influenza is recommended by numerous public health authorities. Despite these recommendations, the rate of vaccine uptake is poor, particularly among those working in long-term care. The current study aimed to use the theoretical domains framework to identify the barriers associated with influenza vaccine uptake among HCWs in long-term care facilities. Design The study employed a cross-sectional survey design. Methods HCWs (n = 372) at 21 long-term care facilities in the west of Ireland completed a paper-based questionnaire, which assessed the socio-demographic and psychosocial determinants associated with HCW influenza vaccine uptake. Results Findings indicated that a logistic regression using the theoretical domains framework demonstrated a strong ability to correctly classify whether or not HCWs received the influenza vaccine. Significant predictors of receiving the vaccine were past vaccination (OR = 16.16, 95% CI = 5.52-47.34), Goals (OR = 3.15, 95% CI = 1.63-6.06), Intentions (OR = 2.42, 95% CI = 1.23-4.77), Social influences (OR = 0.39, 95% CI = 0.18-0.84), and Reinforcement (OR = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.21-0.98). Conclusions This research identified the key psychological determinants associated with HCW vaccine uptake. Interventions that target the theoretical domains, Goals, Intentions, Social influences, and Reinforcement, may enhance vaccine uptake among HCW in long-term care facilities. Statement of contribution What is already known on this subject? Seasonal influenza vaccine uptake among health care workers in long-term care settings is suboptimal. Many socio-demographic, psychosocial, and organizational barriers to vaccination have been identified. However, few studies have explored the barriers to vaccination among health care workers in long-term care settings within a behaviour change theory framework. What does this study add? This is the first study to apply the theoretical domains framework to vaccination behaviour. Health care worker vaccine uptake was associated with having previously received the vaccine and the domains Goals, Intentions, Social influences, and Reinforcement. The findings suggest that interventions that target these domains may increase vaccine uptake among health care workers in long-term care facilities. Possible interventions could include vaccination action planning and promoting vaccination as a positive act rather than a professional responsibility.

Prospective cohort study of influenza vaccine effectiveness among healthcare personnel in Lima, Peru: Estudio Vacuna de Influenza Peru, 2016-2018

Background

The Estudio Vacuna de Influenza Peru (VIP) cohort aims to describe the frequency of influenza virus infection, identify predictors of vaccine acceptance, examine the effects of repeated influenza vaccination on immunogenicity, and evaluate influenza vaccine effectiveness among HCP.

Methods

The VIP cohort prospectively followed HCP in Lima, Peru, during the 2016‐2018 influenza seasons; a fourth year is ongoing. Participants contribute blood samples before and after the influenza season and after influenza vaccination (for vaccinees). Weekly surveillance is conducted to identify acute respiratory or febrile illnesses (ARFI). When an ARFI is identified, participants self‐collect nasal swabs that are tested for influenza viruses by real‐time reverse transcriptase‐polymerase chain reaction. Influenza vaccination status and 5‐year vaccination history are ascertained. We analyzed recruitment and enrollment results for 2016‐2018 and surveillance participation for 2016‐2017.

Results

In the first 3 years of the cohort, VIP successfully contacted 92% of potential participants, enrolled 76% of eligible HCP, and retained >90% of participants across years. About half of participants are medical assistants (54%), and most provide “hands‐on” medical care (76%). Sixty‐nine percent and 52% of participants completed surveillance for >70% of weeks in years 1 and 2, respectively. Fewer weeks of completed surveillance was associated with older age (≥50 years), being a medical assistant, self‐rated health of fair or poor, and not receiving the influenza vaccine during the current season (P‐values < .05).

Conclusions

The VIP cohort provides an opportunity to address knowledge gaps about influenza virus infection, vaccination uptake, effectiveness and immunogenicity among HCP.

An Exploratory Study of Influenza Vaccination Coverage in Healthcare Workers in a Western Chinese City, 2018-2019: Improving Target Population Coverage Based on Policy Interventions

Objectives: To evaluate a policy-based intervention to increase seasonal-influenza-vaccination coverage in healthcare workers in Xining, a city in Western China. Methods: From October 2018 to March 2019, we implemented a free vaccination policy in healthcare workers in Xining. A face-to-face interview with the head of the infection control department and an online survey for medical staff in four tertiary medical facilities was conducted to understand both the implementation of the free policy and influenza vaccination coverage. Possible factors for influenza vaccination among healthcare workers (physician, nurses working on the front-line, HCWs) were investigated by multivariate-logistic regression. Results: Coverage in two hospitals that implemented the free vaccination policy was 30.5% and 25.9%, respectively, which was statistically different to hospitals that did not implement the free policy (7.2% and 8.7%, respectively) (χ2 = 332.56, p < 0.0001). Among vaccinated healthcare workers, 65.5% and 48.6% reported their main reasons for vaccination were a convenient vaccination service and awareness of the free vaccination policy. The reasons for not being vaccinated among the 3389 unvaccinated healthcare workers included: the inconvenient vaccination service (33.8%), believing vaccination was unnecessary (29.7%), concerns about adverse reactions to the vaccine (28.8%), and having to pay for the vaccine (25.6%). Conclusions: Implementing the free vaccination policy, combined with improving the accessibility of the vaccination service, increased seasonal-influenza vaccination-coverage in healthcare workers in Xining.

A rapid evidence appraisal of influenza vaccination in health workers: An important policy in an area of imperfect evidence

INTRODUCTION

The World Health Organization recommends vaccination of health workers (HWs) against influenza, but low uptake is intransigent.We conducted a Rapid Evidence Appraisal on: the risk of influenza in HWs, transmission risk from HWs to patients, the benefit of HW vaccination, and strategies for improving uptake. We aimed to capture a 'whole-of-system' perspective to consider possible benefits for HWs, employers and patients.

METHODS

We executed a comprehensive search of the available literature published from 2006 to 2018 in the English language. We developed search terms for seven separate questions following the PICO framework (population, intervention, comparators, outcomes) and queried nine databases.

RESULTS

Of 3784 publications identified, 52 met inclusion criteria. Seven addressed HW influenza risk, of which four found increased risk; 15 addressed influenza vaccine benefit to HWs or their employers, of which 10 found benefit; 11 addressed influenza transmission from HWs to patients, of which 6 found evidence for transmission; 12 unique studies addressed whether vaccinating HWs produced patient benefit, of which 9 concluded benefits accrued. Regarding the number of HWs needed to vaccinate (NNV) to deliver patient benefit, NNV estimates ranged from 3 to 36,000 but were in significant disagreement. Fourteen studies provided insights on strategies to improve uptake; the strongest evidence was for mandatory vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence on most questions related to influenza vaccination in HWs is mixed and often of low-quality. Substantial heterogeneity exists in terms of study designs and settings, making comparison between studies difficult. Notwithstanding these limitations, a majority of studies suggests that influenza vaccination benefit HWs and their employers; and HWs are implicated in transmission events. The effects of vaccinating HWs on patient morbidity and mortality may include reductions in all-cause mortality and influenza-like illness (ILI). Taken together, the evidence suggests that HW vaccination is an important policy for HWs themselves, their employers, and their patients.

The transmission of the influenza virus from patient to emergency physician: No flu for you

BACKGROUND

Significant morbidity and mortality is attributed to infection with the influenza virus annually and care is often sought in Emergency Departments (ED). The exposure of Emergency Department healthcare personnel and subsequent illness is speculated to be high but has not been quantified.

METHODS

All physicians and mid-level providers in a large tertiary care ED who cared for an Influenza-positive patient were identified and surveyed. Information was gathered regarding each provider's report of an Influenza-like illness during the study period as well as laboratory testing results, sick contacts and subsequent missed work. General descriptive information of Influenza-positive patients was extracted through a retrospective chart review.

RESULTS

1020 Influenza-positive patients were cared for by 106 physicians and advanced practice nurses. Patients testing positive for Influenza-A were more likely to be admitted (p = .003). The majority of patients (83%) were cared for by an attending only. Our provider survey response rate was 87%. 1 in 4 providers reported suffering from an Influenza-like illness during the study period and no providers subsequently missed work days. Only 4 (5%) of those providers sought medical care to receive testing. Overall, 2% of ED providers tested positive for Influenza.

CONCLUSIONS

Among Emergency Department providers, transmission of clinically significant Influenza illness was low.

Influenza vaccination: opinions of health care professionals working in pediatric emergency departments

Background

Vaccine coverage of health care professionals against influenza is still low in Italy, as well as in other European countries.

Methods

Between March and May 2018, this study was performed to collect the opinions of Pediatric health care professionals, working in emergency departments, regarding the efficacy and safety of the influenza vaccine. An anonymous online survey was employed to evaluate socio-demographic and professional characteristics, knowledges, beliefs and attitudes.

Results

Five hundred four health care professionals completed the survey: 331 physicians, 140 nurses and 33 other health are professionals. During the 2017–18 season, 55.8% of physicians, 19.3% of nurses and 12.1% of other health care professionals had vaccinated against the influenza virus. Not vaccinated physicians and nurses with less than 40 years of age were fewer than not vaccinated physicians and nurses with more than 40 years of age. Nurses and other health care professionals were less trustworthy of the influenza vaccination, less aware of the possibility of contracting and transmitting influenza and other vaccine-preventable diseases.

Conclusions

Insufficient adherence to the influenza vaccination in physicians, nurses and other health care professionals is a concern for those assisting high-risk patients, especially in emergency departments. Therefore, it is vital to promote education of health care professionals and students regarding vaccinations. High vaccine coverage should be embedded in the safe hospital paradigm and should become a goal for the hospital's directors.

Evaluating costs and health consequences of sick leave strategies against pandemic and seasonal influenza in Norway using a dynamic model

OBJECTIVES

To quantify population-level health and economic consequences of sick leave among workers with influenza symptoms.

INTERVENTIONS

Compared with current sick leave practice (baseline), we evaluated the health and cost consequences of: (1) increasing the proportion of workers on sick leave from 65% (baseline) to 80% or 90%; (2) shortening the maximum duration from symptom onset to sick leave from 4 days (baseline) to 2 days, 1.5 days, 1 day and 0.5 days; and (3) combinations of 1 and 2.

METHODS

A dynamic compartmental influenza model was developed using Norwegian population data and survey data on employee sick leave practices. The sick leave interventions were simulated under 12 different seasonal epidemic and 36 different pandemic influenza scenarios. These scenarios varied in terms of transmissibility, the proportion of symptomatic cases and illness severity (risk of primary care consultations, hospitalisations and deaths). Using probabilistic sensitivity analyses, a net health benefit approach was adopted to assess the cost-effectiveness of the interventions from a societal perspective.

RESULTS

Compared with current sick leave practice, sick leave interventions were cost-effective for 31 (65%) of the pandemic scenarios, and 11 (92%) of the seasonal scenarios. Economic benefits from sick leave interventions were greatest for scenarios with low transmissibility, high symptomatic proportions and high illness severity. Overall, the health and economic benefits were greatest for the intervention involving 90% of sick workers taking sick leave within one-half day of symptoms. Depending on the influenza scenario, this intervention resulted in a 44.4%-99.7% reduction in the attack rate. Interventions involving sick leave onset beginning 2 days or later, after the onset of symptoms, resulted in economic losses.

CONCLUSIONS

Prompt sick leave onset and a high proportion of sick leave among workers with influenza symptoms may be cost-effective, particularly during influenza epidemics and pandemics with low transmissibility or high morbidity.

The potential economic value of influenza vaccination for healthcare workers in The Netherlands

Background

Despite the clinical evidence, influenza vaccination coverage of healthcare workers remains low. To assess the health economic value of implementing an influenza immunization program among healthcare workers (HCW) in University Medical Centers (UMCs) in the Netherlands, a cost‐benefit model was developed using a societal perspective.

Methods/Patients

The model was based on a trial performed among all UMCs in the Netherlands that included both hospital staff and patients admitted to the pediatrics and internal medicine departments. The model structure and parameters estimates were based on the trial and complemented with literature research, and the impact of uncertainty explored with sensitivity analyses.

Results

In a base‐case scenario without vaccine coverage, influenza‐related annual costs were estimated at € 410 815 for an average UMC with 8000 HCWs and an average occupancy during the influenza period of 6000 hospitalized patients. Of these costs, 82% attributed to the HCWs and 18% were patient‐related. With a vaccination coverage of 15.47%, the societal program’s savings were € 2861 which corresponds to a saving of € 270.53 per extended hospitalization. Univariate sensitivity analyses show that the results are most sensitive to changes in the model parameters vaccine effectiveness in reducing influenza‐like illness (ILI) and the vaccination‐related costs.

Conclusion

In addition to the decreased burden of patient morbidity among hospitalized patients, the effects of the hospital immunization program slightly outweigh the economic investments. These outcomes may support healthcare policymakers’ recommendations about the influenza vaccination program for healthcare workers.

Transmission and Control of Respiratory Viral Infections in the Healthcare Setting

Purpose of the review

Viral respiratory infections have been recognized as a cause of severe illness in immunocompromised and non-immunocompromised hosts. This acknowledgement is a consequence of improvement in diagnosis and better understanding of transmission. Available vaccines and antiviral drugs for prophylaxis and treatment have been developed accordingly. Viral respiratory pathogens are increasingly recognized as nosocomial pathogens as well. The purpose of this review is to describe the most frequent and relevant nosocomial viral respiratory infections, their mechanisms of transmission and the infection control measures to prevent their spread in the healthcare setting.

Recent findings

Although most mechanisms of transmission and control measures of nosocomial viral infections are already known, improved diagnostic tools allow better characterization of these infections and also lead to the discovery of new viruses such as the coronavirus, which is the cause of the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, or the human bocavirus. Also, the ability to understand better the impact, dissemination and prevention of these viruses, allows us to improve the measures to prevent these infections.

Summary

Healthcare viral respiratory infections increase patient morbidity. Each virus has a different mechanism of transmission; therefore, early detection and prompt implementation of infection control measures are very important in order to avoid their transmission in the hospital setting.

Seasonal Influenza Vaccination in Health Care Workers. A Pre-Post Intervention Study in an Italian Paediatric Hospital

Despite relevant recommendations and evidences on the efficacy of influenza vaccination in health care workers (HCWs), vaccination coverage rates in Europe and Italy currently do not exceed 25%. Aim of the study is to measure the variations in vaccination coverage rates in an Italian pediatric hospital after a promotion campaign performed in the period October⁻December 2017. The design is a pre-post intervention study. The intervention is based on a wide communication campaign and an expanded offer of easy vaccination on site. The study was carried out at Bambino Gesù Children’s hospital in Rome, Italy, on the whole population of HCWs. Univariate and multivariate statistical analyses were performed. Vaccination coverage rate increased in 2017/18 campaign compared with the 2016/17 one (+95 HCWs vaccinated; +4.4%). The highest increases were detected in males (+45.7%), youngest employees (+142.9%), mean age of employment (+175%), other HCWs (+209.1%), Emergency Area (+151.6%) and Imaging Diagnostic Department (+200.0%). At multivariate logistic regression, working in some departments and being nurses represents a higher risk of being unvaccinated. Although the vaccination coverage rate remained low, a continuous increase of the coverage rate and development of a different consciousness in HCWs was highlighted. The study significantly identified the target for future campaigns.

Vaccines for preventing influenza in the elderly

BACKGROUND

The consequences of influenza in the elderly (those age 65 years or older) are complications, hospitalisations, and death. The primary goal of influenza vaccination in the elderly is to reduce the risk of death among people who are most vulnerable. This is an update of a review published in 2010. Future updates of this review will be made only when new trials or vaccines become available. Observational data included in previous versions of the review have been retained for historical reasons but have not been updated because of their lack of influence on the review conclusions.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects (efficacy, effectiveness, and harm) of vaccines against influenza in the elderly.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 11), which includes the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialised Register; MEDLINE (1966 to 31 December 2016); Embase (1974 to 31 December 2016); Web of Science (1974 to 31 December 2016); CINAHL (1981 to 31 December 2016); LILACS (1982 to 31 December 2016); WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP; 1 July 2017); and ClinicalTrials.gov (1 July 2017).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs assessing efficacy against influenza (laboratory-confirmed cases) or effectiveness against influenza-like illness (ILI) or safety. We considered any influenza vaccine given independently, in any dose, preparation, or time schedule, compared with placebo or with no intervention. Previous versions of this review included 67 cohort and case-control studies. The searches for these trial designs are no longer updated.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Review authors independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We rated the certainty of evidence with GRADE for the key outcomes of influenza, ILI, complications (hospitalisation, pneumonia), and adverse events. We have presented aggregate control group risks to illustrate the effect in absolute terms. We used them as the basis for calculating the number needed to vaccinate to prevent one case of each event for influenza and ILI outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified eight RCTs (over 5000 participants), of which four assessed harms. The studies were conducted in community and residential care settings in Europe and the USA between 1965 and 2000. Risk of bias reduced our certainty in the findings for influenza and ILI, but not for other outcomes.Older adults receiving the influenza vaccine may experience less influenza over a single season compared with placebo, from 6% to 2.4% (risk ratio (RR) 0.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 to 0.66; low-certainty evidence). We rated the evidence as low certainty due to uncertainty over how influenza was diagnosed. Older adults probably experience less ILI compared with those who do not receive a vaccination over the course of a single influenza season (3.5% versus 6%; RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.73; moderate-certainty evidence). These results indicate that 30 people would need to be vaccinated to prevent one person experiencing influenza, and 42 would need to be vaccinated to prevent one person having an ILI.The study providing data for mortality and pneumonia was underpowered to detect differences in these outcomes. There were 3 deaths from 522 participants in the vaccination arm and 1 death from 177 participants in the placebo arm, providing very low-certainty evidence for the effect on mortality (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.11 to 9.72). No cases of pneumonia occurred in one study that reported this outcome (very low-certainty evidence). No data on hospitalisations were reported. Confidence intervaIs around the effect of vaccines on fever and nausea were wide, and we do not have enough information about these harms in older people (fever: 1.6% with placebo compared with 2.5% after vaccination (RR 1.57, 0.92 to 2.71; moderate-certainty evidence)); nausea (2.4% with placebo compared with 4.2% after vaccination (RR 1.75, 95% CI 0.74 to 4.12; low-certainty evidence)).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Older adults receiving the influenza vaccine may have a lower risk of influenza (from 6% to 2.4%), and probably have a lower risk of ILI compared with those who do not receive a vaccination over the course of a single influenza season (from 6% to 3.5%). We are uncertain how big a difference these vaccines will make across different seasons. Very few deaths occurred, and no data on hospitalisation were reported. No cases of pneumonia occurred in one study that reported this outcome. We do not have enough information to assess harms relating to fever and nausea in this population.The evidence for a lower risk of influenza and ILI with vaccination is limited by biases in the design or conduct of the studies. Lack of detail regarding the methods used to confirm the diagnosis of influenza limits the applicability of this result. The available evidence relating to complications is of poor quality, insufficient, or old and provides no clear guidance for public health regarding the safety, efficacy, or effectiveness of influenza vaccines for people aged 65 years or older. Society should invest in research on a new generation of influenza vaccines for the elderly.

Heterogeneous and Dynamic Prevalence of Asymptomatic Influenza Virus Infections

Extreme heterogeneity was found within and between influenza types, which should be considered in planning of mitigation campaigns.

Influenza infection manifests in a wide spectrum of severity, including symptomless pathogen carriers. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 55 studies to elucidate the proportional representation of these asymptomatic infected persons. We observed extensive heterogeneity among these studies. The prevalence of asymptomatic carriage (total absence of symptoms) ranged from 5.2% to 35.5% and subclinical cases (illness that did not meet the criteria for acute respiratory or influenza-like illness) from 25.4% to 61.8%. Statistical analysis showed that the heterogeneity could not be explained by the type of influenza, the laboratory tests used to detect the virus, the year of the study, or the location of the study. Projections of infection spread and strategies for disease control require that we identify the proportional representation of these insidious spreaders early on in the emergence of new influenza subtypes or strains and track how this rate evolves over time and space.

Healthcare worker influenza vaccination and sickness absence - an ecological study

Although Influenza vaccination is recommended for healthcare workers, vaccination rates in UK healthcare workers are only around 50%. We investigated the association between NHS sickness absence rates (using data from Health and Social Care Information Centre quarterly reports), staff vaccination rates and influenza vaccine efficacy (from Public Health England), influenza deaths (from the Office of National Statistics) and staff satisfaction (from www.NHSstaffsurveys.com). Data from 223 healthcare trusts covered approximately 800,000 staff in each of four influenza seasons from 2011; overall staff sickness rate was roughly 4.5%. Annual vaccination rates varied between 44% and 54%. Higher NHS trust vaccination rates were associated with reduced sickness absence (β = -0.425 [95% CI -0.658 to -0.192], p<0.001). Thus, a 10% increase in vaccination rate would be associated with a 10% fall in sickness absence rate. Influenza vaccination for NHS staff is associated with reduced sickness absence rates.

Influenza in long-term care facilities

Long-term care facility environments and the vulnerability of their residents provide a setting conducive to the rapid spread of influenza virus and other respiratory pathogens. Infections may be introduced by staff, visitors or new or transferred residents, and outbreaks of influenza in such settings can have devastating consequences for individuals, as well as placing extra strain on health services. As the population ages over the coming decades, increased provision of such facilities seems likely. The need for robust infection prevention and control practices will therefore remain of paramount importance if the impact of outbreaks is to be minimised. In this review, we discuss the nature of the problem of influenza in long-term care facilities, and approaches to preventive and control measures, including vaccination of residents and staff, and the use of antiviral drugs for treatment and prophylaxis, based on currently available evidence.

Influenza vaccine effectiveness among high-risk groups: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies

Vaccination represents the most effective intervention to prevent infection, hospitalization and mortality due to influenza. This meta-analysis quantifies data reporting influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) on influenza visits and hospitalizations of case-control and cohort studies among high-risk groups.

A systematic literature review including original articles published between 2007 and 2016, using a protocol registered on Prospero with No. 42017054854, and a meta-analysis were conducted.

For 3 high-risk groups (subjects with underlying health conditions, pregnant women and health care workers) only a qualitative evaluation was performed. The VE quantitative analysis demonstrated a clear significant overall effect of 39% (95%CI: 32–46%) for visits and 57% (95%CI: 30–74%) for hospitalization among children. Considering the elderly influenza VE had a clear effect of 25% (95%CI: 6–40%) for visits and 14% (95%CI: 7–21%; p<0.001) for hospitalization.

This study showed the high VE of influenza vaccination among high-risk groups, representing a tool for public health decision-makers to develop evidence-based preventive interventions to avoid influenza outcomes.

Knowledge and attitudes among patients with asthma and parents and physicians towards influenza vaccination

BACKGROUND

Influenza is an infectious disease, dangerous for all people, especially for some risk groups such as patients with chronic diseases and health care workers. But most of the people under the risk of influenza, including health care workers are not immunised because of misinformation. In this study, we aimed to determine the knowledge, beliefs and attitudes of patients with allergic rhinitis and asthma and parents of such children related to influenza vaccination. Attitudes and beliefs of physicians treating these patients about influenza vaccination were also investigated.

METHODS

Two different questionnaires consisting of various items related to influenza vaccine were distributed to physicians and patients and parents of children with asthma and allergic disease.

RESULTS

The physicians group consisted of 189 physicians from various branches. About one third of physicians from various branches reported that they did not believe the vaccine's effectiveness. Most of the participating physicians did not immunise themselves with influenza vaccination despite the fact that any patient of theirs had died due to influenza infection. Although nearly half of the 183 patients had been vaccinated with influenza vaccine, only 27% of adults and 11.7% of children had been vaccinated annually.

CONCLUSIONS

Asthmatic patients are not immunised regularly with influenza vaccine due to misperceptions about vaccine effectiveness and fear of adverse effects. Another important reason of this is that most the physicians caring for these patients neither immunise themselves nor recommend the vaccine to their patients.

Influenza Vaccination of Healthcare Workers: Critical Analysis of the Evidence for Patient Benefit Underpinning Policies of Enforcement

BACKGROUND

Four cluster randomized controlled trials (cRCTs) conducted in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) have reported reductions in patient risk through increased healthcare worker (HCW) influenza vaccination. This evidence has led to expansive policies of enforcement that include all staff of acute care hospitals and other healthcare settings beyond LTCFs. We critique and quantify the cRCT evidence for indirect patient benefit underpinning policies of mandatory HCW influenza vaccination.

METHODS

Plausibility of the four cRCT findings attributing indirect patient benefits to HCW influenza vaccination was assessed by comparing percentage reductions in patient risk reported by the cRCTs to predicted values. Plausibly predicted values were derived according to the basic mathematical principle of dilution, taking into account HCW influenza vaccine coverage and the specificity of patient outcomes for influenza. Accordingly, predicted values were calculated as a function of relevant compound probabilities including vaccine efficacy (ranging 40-60% in HCWs and favourably assuming the same indirect protection conferred through them to patients) × change in proportionate HCW influenza vaccine coverage (as reported by each cRCT) × percentage of a given patient outcome (e.g. influenza-like illness (ILI) or all-cause mortality) plausibly due to influenza virus. The number needed to vaccinate (NNV) for HCWs to indirectly prevent patient death was recalibrated based on real patient data of hospital-acquired influenza, with adjustment for potential under-detection (5.2-fold), and using favourable assumptions of HCW-attributable risk (ranging 60-80%).

RESULTS

In attributing patient benefit to increased HCW influenza vaccine coverage, each cRCT was found to violate the basic mathematical principle of dilution by reporting greater percentage reductions with less influenza-specific patient outcomes (i.e., all-cause mortality > ILI > laboratory-confirmed influenza) and/or patient mortality reductions exceeding even favourably-derived predicted values by at least 6- to 15-fold. If extrapolated to all LTCF and hospital staff in the United States, the prior cRCT-claimed NNV of 8 would implausibly mean >200,000 and >675,000 patient deaths, respectively, could be prevented annually by HCW influenza vaccination, inconceivably exceeding total US population mortality estimates due to seasonal influenza each year, or during the 1918 pandemic, respectively. More realistic recalibration based on actual patient data instead shows that at least 6000 to 32,000 hospital workers would need to be vaccinated before a single patient death could potentially be averted.

CONCLUSIONS

The four cRCTs underpinning policies of enforced HCW influenza vaccination attribute implausibly large reductions in patient risk to HCW vaccination, casting serious doubts on their validity. The impression that unvaccinated HCWs place their patients at great influenza peril is exaggerated. Instead, the HCW-attributable risk and vaccine-preventable fraction both remain unknown and the NNV to achieve patient benefit still requires better understanding. Although current scientific data are inadequate to support the ethical implementation of enforced HCW influenza vaccination, they do not refute approaches to support voluntary vaccination or other more broadly protective practices, such as staying home or masking when acutely ill.

Influenza like Illness among Medical Residents Anticipates Influenza Diffusion in General Population: Data from a National Survey among Italian Medical Residents

The aim of this multicentre study was to assess incidence of influenza like illness (ILI) among Italian medical residents (MRs) during 2011–2012 influenza season, to detect variables associated with ILI and to compare estimated ILI incidence among MRs and general population. A cross-sectional survey was carried out throughout an anonymous questionnaire administered to all MRs attending the post-graduate medical schools of 18 Italian Universities. At the same time an analysis of the ILI incidence in the Italian general population was conducted through the Italian Influenza Surveillance Network. Of a total of 2,506 MRs, 1,191 (47.5%) reported at least one ILI episode. A higher proportion of ILIs was reported by MRs of Central (25.0% with ILI vs 20.2% without ILI) and Southern Italy (40.2% with ILI vs. 36.4 without ILI) compared to Northern Italy (34.8% with ILI vs. 43.4% without ILI) (p<0.001). Italian MRs had a higher cumulative incidence of ILIs (546.7 episodes per 1,000 vs. 75.9 episodes per 1,000) and an earlier peak (January 2012 vs. February 2012), compared to general population due to higher number of contacts in hospital setting. MRs reported a high rate of ILI infection probably in association with their working activities. These data suggest the need to offer an earlier influenza vaccination to HCWs than general population with the aim to both prevent ILI and its transmission to patients.

Understanding healthcare worker uptake of influenza vaccination: a survey

he growing threat of pandemic influenza highlights the importance of influenza vaccination as a public health measure. Yet despite the many benefits associated with influenza vaccination, national uptake by healthcare workers has remained low since being introduced for such staff in 2000. Improving uptake of influenza vaccination in healthcare workers has potential health benefits for individuals in terms of protection against the disease. Other possible benefits include a reduction in risk of nosocomial transmission to patient populations, improved public health for the population as a whole along with more efficient use of healthcare resources within the NHS. This research explored factors influencing influenza vaccination uptake in healthcare workers, by investigating knowledge, attitudes and behaviour of qualified nursing staff directly involved in patient care in NHS Lanarkshire. Differences in knowledge, attitudes and behaviours towards influenza vaccination were found across the targeted population. Such findings have the potential to inform and enhance the design and implementation of upcoming vaccination campaigns.

Influenza Vaccination of Healthcare Workers in the United States, 1989-2002

Objectives.

We sought to estimate influenza vaccination coverage among healthcare workers (HCWs) in the United States during 1989-2002 and to identify factors associated with vaccination in this group. The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends annual influenza vaccination for HCWs to reduce transmission of influenza to patients at high risk for serious complications of influenza.

Design.

Analysis of cross-sectional data from 1989-2002 surveys conducted by the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). The outcome measure was self-reported influenza vaccination in the past 12 months. Bivariate and multivariate analysis of 2002 NHIS data.

Setting.

Household interviews conducted during 1989-2002, weighted to reflect the noninstitutionalized, civilian US population.

Participants.

Adults aged 18 years or older participated in the study. A total of 2,089 were employed in healthcare occupations or settings in 2002, and 17,160 were employed in nonhealthcare occupations or settings.

Results.

The influenza vaccination rate among US HCWs increased from 10.0% in 1989 to 38.4% in 2002, with no significant change since 1997. In a multivariate model that included data from the 2002 NHIS, factors associated with a higher rate of influenza vaccination among HCWs aged 18-64 years included age of 50 years or older (odds ratio [OR], 1.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-2.1), hospital employee status (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2-1.9), 1 or more visits to the office of a healthcare professional in the past 12 months (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.2), receipt of employer-provided health insurance (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.1), a history of pneumococcal vaccination (OR, 3.9; 95% CI, 2.5-6.1), and history of hepatitis B vaccination (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.4-2.4). Non-Hispanic black persons were less likely to be vaccinated (OR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.5-0.9) than non-Hispanic white persons. There were no significant differences in vaccination levels according to HCW occupation category.

Conclusions.

Influenza immunization among HCWs reached a plateau during 1997-2002. New strategies are needed to encourage US HCWs to receive influenza vaccination to prevent influenza illness in themselves and transmission of influenza to vulnerable patients.

Influenza Vaccination of Healthcare Workers and Vaccine Allocation for Healthcare Workers During Vaccine Shortages

Influenza causes substantial morbidity and mortality annually, particularly in high-risk groups such as the elderly, young children, immunosuppressed individuals, and individuals with chronic illnesses. Healthcare-associated transmission of influenza contributes to this burden but is often under-recognized except in the setting of large outbreaks. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has recommended annual influenza vaccination for healthcare workers (HCWs) with direct patient contact since 1984 and for all HCWs since 1993. The rationale for these recommendations is to reduce the chance that HCWs serve as vectors for healthcare-associated influenza due to their close contact with high-risk patients and to enhance both HCW and patient safety. Despite these recommendations as well as the effectiveness of interventions designed to increase HCW vaccination rates, the percentage of HCWs vaccinated annually remains unacceptably low. Ironically, at the same time that campaigns have sought to increase HCW vaccination rates, vaccine shortages, such as the shortage during the 2004-2005 influenza season, present challenges regarding allocation of available vaccine supplies to both patients and HCWs. This two-part document outlines the position of the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America on influenza vaccination for HCWs and provides guidance for the allocation of influenza vaccine to HCWs during a vaccine shortage based on influenza transmission routes and the essential need for a practical and adaptive strategy for allocation. These recommendations apply to all types of healthcare facilities, including acute care hospitals, long-term-care facilities, and ambulatory care settings.

Influenza vaccination for healthcare workers who care for people aged 60 or older living in long-term care institutions

BACKGROUND

A systematic review found that 3% of working adults who had received influenza vaccine and 5% of those who were unvaccinated had laboratory-proven influenza per season; in healthcare workers (HCWs) these percentages were 5% and 8% respectively. Healthcare workers may transmit influenza to patients.

OBJECTIVES

To identify all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs assessing the effects of vaccinating healthcare workers on the incidence of laboratory-proven influenza, pneumonia, death from pneumonia and admission to hospital for respiratory illness in those aged 60 years or older resident in long-term care institutions (LTCIs).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (2015, Issue 9), MEDLINE (1966 to October week 3, 2015), EMBASE (1974 to October 2015) and Web of Science (2006 to October 2015), but Biological Abstracts only from 1969 to March 2013 and Science Citation Index-Expanded from 1974 to March 2013 due to lack of institutional access in 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs of influenza vaccination of healthcare workers caring for individuals aged 60 years or older in LTCIs and the incidence of laboratory-proven influenza and its complications (lower respiratory tract infection, or hospitalisation or death due to lower respiratory tract infection) in individuals aged 60 years or older in LTCIs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias. Effects on dichotomous outcomes were measured as risk differences (RDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the quality of evidence with GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified four cluster-RCTs and one cohort study (n = 12,742) of influenza vaccination for HCWs caring for individuals ≥ 60 years in LTCIs. Four cluster RCTs (5896 residents) provided outcome data that addressed the objectives of our review. The studies were comparable in their study populations, intervention and outcome measures. The studies did not report adverse events. The principal sources of bias in the studies related to attrition, lack of blinding, contamination in the control groups and low rates of vaccination coverage in the intervention arms, leading us to downgrade the quality of evidence for all outcomes due to serious risk of bias.Offering influenza vaccination to HCWs based in long term care homes may have little or no effect on the number of residents who develop laboratory-proven influenza compared with those living in care homes where no vaccination is offered (RD 0 (95% CI -0.03 to 0.03), two studies with samples taken from 752 participants; low quality evidence). HCW vaccination probably leads to a reduction in lower respiratory tract infection in residents from 6% to 4% (RD -0.02 (95% CI -0.04 to 0.01), one study of 3400 people; moderate quality evidence). HCW vaccination programmes may have little or no effect on the number of residents admitted to hospital for respiratory illness (RD 0 (95% CI -0.02 to 0.02, one study of 1059 people; low quality evidence). We decided not to combine data on deaths from lower respiratory tract infection (two studies of 4459 people) or all cause deaths (four studies of 8468 people). The direction and size of difference in risk varied between the studies. We are uncertain as to the effect of vaccination on these outcomes due to the very low quality of evidence. Adjusted analyses, which took into account the cluster design, did not differ substantively from the pooled analysis with unadjusted data.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review findings have not identified conclusive evidence of benefit of HCW vaccination programmes on specific outcomes of laboratory-proven influenza, its complications (lower respiratory tract infection, hospitalisation or death due to lower respiratory tract illness), or all cause mortality in people over the age of 60 who live in care institutions. This review did not find information on co-interventions with healthcare worker vaccination: hand-washing, face masks, early detection of laboratory-proven influenza, quarantine, avoiding admissions, antivirals and asking healthcare workers with influenza or influenza-like illness (ILI) not to work. This review does not provide reasonable evidence to support the vaccination of healthcare workers to prevent influenza in those aged 60 years or older resident in LTCIs. High quality RCTs are required to avoid the risks of bias in methodology and conduct identified by this review and to test further these interventions in combination.

The pregnant healthcare worker: fact and fiction

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

A pregnant healthcare worker (HCW) may be at risk of occupational exposure to pathogens associated with increased maternal morbidity and mortality as well as perinatal complications. In this article, we review recent literature on infectious diseases commonly encountered in the healthcare setting and of highest concern for a pregnant HCW, focusing on prevention and management of exposures.

RECENT FINDINGS

Pregnancy does not seem to be an independent risk factor for occupationally acquired infectious diseases. Vaccination and standard precautions continue to be the most effective means of preventing transmission to HCWs. Pandemic 2009 influenza A (H1N1) is associated with increased risk of fetal death, highlighting the importance of influenza vaccination. A recent meta-analysis highlights the safety of influenza vaccination during pregnancy. New treatments for hepatitis C have not been studied in pregnancy but pose an important area for research and advancement. Cytomegalovirus immunoglobulin may play a role in postexposure prophylaxis but recent results are inconclusive.

SUMMARY

Primary prevention with vaccination and use of appropriate infection control precautions is imperative for prevention of occupationally acquired infectious diseases. Pregnant HCWs with occupational exposure to communicable diseases should be evaluated immediately for appropriate postexposure prophylaxis and followed for development of active infection.

Influenza vaccination in high-risk groups: a revision of existing guidelines and rationale for an evidence-based preventive strategy

Influenza, an infectious respiratory disease, is one of the main causes of excess winter deaths (EWDs) in Europe. Annual flu epidemics are associated with high morbidity and mortality rates, especially among the elderly, those with underlying health conditions and pregnant women. Health Care Workers (HCWs) are also considered at high risk of both contracting influenza and spreading the virus to vulnerable patients. During the 2014/2015 season, the excess winter mortality rates observed in countries of the northern hemisphere (EuroMOMO network) and in Italy (+13%) were strongly related to the intensity of influenza circulation. Influenza vaccination is the most important public health intervention to prevent seasonal influenza transmission and infection. However, to date, influenza vaccination coverage reported in Europe (including high-risk groups) is still largely unsatisfactory. This study analyzes some international and European guidelines on influenza vaccination and the rationale that underlies evidence- based public health intervention for the prevention of influenza among the principal high-risk groups: a) the elderly (subjects aged 65 years or older); b) subjects with underlying health conditions; c) pregnant women; d) healthcare workers. Only by achievement recommended influenza vaccination coverage among high-risk groups in all European countries can we reduce the burden of disease.

Changing the default to promote influenza vaccination among health care workers

BACKGROUND

The prevention of health care acquired infections is an important objective for patient safety and infection control in all health care settings. Influenza vaccination uptake among health care workers (HCWs) is the most effective method to prevent transmission to patients, but vaccination coverage rates are low among HCWs. Several educational campaigns have been developed to increase the influenza vaccination coverage rates of HCWs, but showed only small effects. The aim of this study was to test an opt-out strategy in promoting uptake among HCWs in a tertiary care center for patients with complex chronic organ failure.

METHODS

HCWs were randomly assigned to one of two conditions. In the opt-out condition (N=61), participants received an e-mail with a pre-scheduled appointment for influenza vaccination, which could be changed or canceled. In the opt-in condition (N=61), participants received an e-mail explaining that they had to schedule an appointment if they wanted to get vaccinated.

RESULTS

The findings show no statistically detectable effect of condition on being vaccinated against influenza. However, HCWs in the opt-out condition were more likely to have an appointment for influenza vaccination, which in turn increased the probability of getting vaccinated.

CONCLUSION

To change the default to promote influenza vaccination among HCWs might be an easy and cost-effective alternative to the complex vaccination campaigns that have been proposed in recent years.

Characterisation of nosocomial and community-acquired influenza in a large university hospital during two consecutive influenza seasons

BACKGROUND

Nosocomial influenza is increasingly recognized as an important public health threat causing considerable morbidity and mortality each year. However, data on nosocomial influenza is usually collected during outbreaks only and clinical information of nosocomial influenza is sparsely available.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically analyse the distribution of nosocomial and community-acquired influenza and epidemiological characteristics in a tertiary care unit in two consecutive seasons.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective observational study was conducted to identify and characterise cases of nosocomial and community-acquired influenza at Freiburg University hospital from 1 January 2013 to 30 April 2014. A validated multiplex RT-PCR to detect influenza virus and other respiratory pathogens was used throughout. Clinical information was retrieved from the hospital-based information system.

RESULTS

Overall, 218 patients with laboratory-confirmed influenza were included (179 in the first, 39 patients in the second season). A rate of 20% of nosocomial influenza was observed throughout. A fatal outcome was recorded for 9% of nosocomial cases, which were mainly associated with influenza virus A(H1N1)pdm09. Nosocomial influenza occurred in all age groups, but fatalities were only observed in patients ≥18 years. Patients with nosocomial influenza were significantly older, underwent therapy for blood malignancies and immunosuppressive regimens more frequently, and received solid organ transplantation more often compared to community-acquired patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the different distribution of virus subtypes and epidemiological properties between both influenza seasons, the rate of nosocomial cases remained similar. Systematic detection and targeted prevention measures seem mandatory to minimize nosocomial influenza.

Network position and health care worker infections

We use a newly collected data set coupled with an agent-based model to study the spread of infectious disease in hospitals. We estimate the average and marginal infections created by various worker groups in a hospital as a function of their network position in order to identify groups most crucial in a hospital-based epidemic. Surprisingly, we find that many groups with primary patient care responsibilities play a small role in spreading an infectious disease within our hospital data set. We also demonstrate that the effect of different network positions can be as important as the effect of different transmission rates for some categories of workers.