ABSTRACT
In January 2019, a human seasonal reassortant influenza A(H1N2) virus with a novel 7:1 genetic constellation was identified in a 68-year-old female patient with suspected pneumonia. The virus harboured A(H3N2) neuraminidase and remaining genes from A(H1N1)pdm09. The patient recovered after severe illness. No additional cases have been detected. This is the second identified A(H1N2) seasonal reassortant in a human in Europe within 1 year; a previous case was detected in the Netherlands in March 2018.
Subject(s)
Influenza A Virus, H1N2 Subtype/isolation & purification , Influenza, Human/diagnosis , Nasopharynx/virology , Reassortant Viruses/isolation & purification , Aged , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic use , Female , Humans , Influenza A Virus, H1N1 Subtype/genetics , Influenza A Virus, H1N2 Subtype/genetics , Influenza A Virus, H3N2 Subtype/genetics , Influenza, Human/drug therapy , Influenza, Human/virology , Neuraminidase/genetics , Oseltamivir/therapeutic use , Polymerase Chain Reaction , Reassortant Viruses/genetics , Seasons , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Policies for handling cases of penicillin-non-susceptible Streptococcus pneumoniae (PNSP) in day-care groups vary between different counties in Sweden. The aim of this study was to evaluate the epidemiological effect of excluding PNSP-carriers from children's day-care centres (DCC). We followed the incidence in 14 DCC groups with ongoing PNSP-spread, by repeated group screens until no further cases could be identified. All identified carriers were excluded from DCC attendance in study area A (Skåne region) while they remained in the group in study area B (Göteborg and örebro), according to local policies. The intervention effect was evaluated by comparing the number of additional cases after the baseline screen (start of the intervention period) between the 2 study areas. All PNSP-isolates were characterized by resistance pattern, serotype and pulse-field gel electrophoresis. The relative risk for children in DCCs without active intervention was 6.4 (95% CI: 2.0-20.7). Each prevented case in area A can be estimated to have demanded the exclusion of 2 other children from day care for approximately 4 weeks each. The total cost-benefit outcome of this action has to be seen in the light of the local situation with regard to the population prevalence and the distribution of other risk factors.
