A comparison of coronavirus disease 2019 and seasonal influenza surveillance in five European countries: France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: In response to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak that unfolded across Europe in 2020, the World Health Organisation (WHO) called for repurposing existing influenza surveillance systems to monitor COVID-19. This analysis aimed to compare descriptively the extent to which influenza surveillance systems were adapted and enhanced and how COVID-19 surveillance could ultimately benefit or disrupt routine influenza surveillance. METHODS: We used a previously developed framework in France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom to describe COVID-19 surveillance and its impact on influenza surveillance. The framework divides surveillance systems into seven subsystems and 20 comparable outcomes of interest and uses five evaluation criteria based on WHO guidance. Information on influenza and COVID-19 surveillance systems were collected from publicly available resources shared by European and national public health agencies. RESULTS: Overall, non-medically attended, virological, primary care and mortality surveillance were adapted in most countries to monitor COVID-19, although community, outbreak and hospital surveillance were reinforced in all countries. Data granularity improved, with more detailed demographic and medical information recorded. A shift to systematic notification for cases and deaths enhanced both geographic and population representativeness, although the sampling strategy benefited from the roll out of widespread molecular testing. Data communication was greatly enhanced, contributing to improved public awareness. CONCLUSIONS: Well-established influenza surveillance systems are a key component of pandemic preparedness, and their upgrade allowed European countries to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, uncertainties remain on how both influenza and COVID-19 surveillance can be jointly and durably implemented.

Cost-utility analysis of influenza vaccination in a population aged 65 years or older in Spain with a high-dose vaccine versus an adjuvanted vaccine.

BACKGROUND: The normal ageing process is accompanied by immunosenescence and a progressive weakening of the immune system. High-dose inactivated influenza quadrivalent vaccine (HD-QIV) has shown greater immunogenicity, relative efficacy, and effectiveness than the standard-dose inactivated quadrivalent vaccine (SD-QIV). The aim of the study was to assess the cost-utility of an HD-QIV strategy compared with an adjuvanted trivalent inactivated vaccine (aTIV) strategy in the population above 65 years of age in Spain. METHODS: We evaluated the public health and economic benefits of alternatives by using a decision-tree model, which included influenza cases, visits to the general practitioner (GP), visits to the emergency department (ED), hospitalisations, and mortality related to influenza. We performed deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses to account for both epidemiological and economical sources of uncertainty. RESULTS: Our results show that switching from aTIV strategy to HD-QIV would prevent 36,476 cases of influenza, 5,143 visits to GP, 1,054 visits to the ED, 9,193 episodes of hospitalisation due to influenza or pneumonia, and 357 deaths due to influenza - increasing 3,514 life-years and 3,167 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Healthcare costs increase by €78,874,301, leading to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €24,353/QALY. The sensitivity analysis indicates that the results are rather robust. CONCLUSION: Our analysis shows that HD-QIV in people over 65 years of age is an influenza-prevention strategy that is at least cost-effective, if not dominant, in Spain. It reduces cases of influenza, GP visits, hospitalisations, deaths, and associated healthcare costs.