Estimates of Seasonal Influenza Burden That Could Be Averted by Improved Influenza Vaccines in the Australian Population Aged Under 65 Years, 2015-2019.

BACKGROUND: The interpretation of relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of improved influenza vaccines is complex. Estimation of burden averted is useful to contextualise their potential impact across different seasons. For the population aged under 65 years in Australia, this study estimated the additional morbidity and mortality that could be averted using improved influenza vaccines. METHODS: We used observed, season-specific (2015-2019) influenza notification and influenza-coded hospitalisation frequencies and published modelled estimates of influenza-associated hospitalisations and deaths that occurred under the prevailing influenza vaccination coverage scenario. After back-calculating to the estimated burden in the population without vaccination, we applied published standard influenza vaccine effectiveness and coverage estimates to calculate the burden potentially averted by standard and improved influenza vaccines. A plausible range of rVE values were used, assuming 50% coverage. RESULTS: The percentage point difference in absolute vaccine effectiveness (VE) of an improved vaccine compared to a standard vaccine is directly proportional to its rVE and inversely proportional to the effectiveness of the standard vaccine. The incremental burden averted by an improved vaccine is a function of both its difference in absolute VE and the severity of the influenza season. Assuming an rVE of 15% with 50% coverage, the improved vaccine was estimated to additionally avert 1517 to 12,641 influenza notifications, 287 to 1311 influenza-coded hospitalisations and 9 to 33 modelled all-cause influenza deaths per year compared to the standard vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: Improved vaccines can have substantial clinical and population impact, particularly when the effectiveness of standard vaccines is low, and burden is high.

Impacts of extreme weather on the health and well-being of people who are homeless.

This letter responds to the article by Cusack et al., 'Extreme weather-related health needs of people who are homeless' (Australian Journal of Primary Health, 2013, 19(3), 250-255), which addressed the impacts of extreme weather on the health of the homeless population in inner city Adelaide. We compare the findings of Cusack et al. to our own original research, based on interviews with service providers to the homeless in urban and rural Victoria. We further place this issue in the broader context of climate change, which is crucial given the expected increase in extreme weather events and associated health impacts.