The burden and epidemiology of hepatitis B and hepatitis D in Georgia: findings from the national seroprevalence survey.

OBJECTIVES: The burden of hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis D virus (HDV) infections is unknown in Georgia. This analysis describes the prevalence of hepatitis B and coinfection with HDV and the demographic characteristics and risk factors for persons with HBV infection in Georgia. STUDY DESIGN: This is a cross-sectional seroprevalence study. METHODS: A cross-sectional, nationwide survey to assess hepatitis B prevalence among the general adult Georgian population (age ≥18 years) was conducted in 2015. Demographic and risk behavior data were collected. Blood specimens were screened for anti-hepatitis B core total antibody (anti-HBc). Anti-HBc-positive specimens were tested for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg). HBsAg-positive specimens were tested for HBV and HDV nucleic acid. Nationally weighted prevalence estimates and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) for potential risk factors were determined for anti-HBc and HBsAg positivity. RESULTS: The national prevalence of anti-HBc and HBsAg positivity among adults were 25.9% and 2.9%, respectively. Persons aged ≥70 years had the highest anti-HBc positivity (32.7%), but the lowest HBsAg positivity prevalence (1.3%). Anti-HBc positivity was associated with injection drug use (aOR = 2.34; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.46-3.74), receipt of a blood transfusion (aOR = 1.68; 95% CI = 1.32-2.15), and sex with a commercial sex worker (aOR = 1.46; 95% CI = 1.06-2.01). HBsAg positivity was associated with receipt of a blood transfusion (aOR = 2.72; 95% CI = 1.54-4.80) and past incarceration (aOR = 2.72; 95% CI = 1.25-5.93). Among HBsAg-positive persons, 0.9% (95% CI = 0.0-2.0) were HDV coinfected. CONCLUSIONS: Georgia has an intermediate to high burden of hepatitis B, and the prevalence of HDV coinfection among HBV-infected persons is low. Existing infrastructure for hepatitis C elimination could be leveraged to promote hepatitis B elimination.

Clustering of hepatitis C virus antibody positivity within households and communities in Punjab, India.

To better understand hepatitis C virus (HCV) epidemiology in Punjab state, India, we estimated the distribution of HCV antibody positivity (anti-HCV+) using a 2013-2014 HCV household seroprevalence survey. Household anti-HCV+ clustering was investigated (a) by individual-level multivariable logistic regression, and (b) comparing the observed frequency of households with multiple anti-HCV+ persons against the expected, simulated frequency assuming anti-HCV+ persons are randomly distributed. Village/ward-level clustering was investigated similarly. We estimated household-level associations between exposures and the number of anti-HCV+ members in a household (N = 1593 households) using multivariable ordered logistic regression. Anti-HCV+ prevalence was 3.6% (95% confidence interval 3.0-4.2%). Individual-level regression (N = 5543 participants) found an odds ratio of 3.19 (2.25-4.50) for someone being anti-HCV+ if another household member was anti-HCV+. Thirty households surveyed had ⩾2 anti-HCV+ members, whereas 0/1000 (P < 0.001) simulations had ⩾30 such households. Excess village-level clustering was evident: 10 villages had ⩾6 anti-HCV+ members, occurring in 31/1000 simulations (P = 0.031). The household-level model indicated the number of household members, living in southern Punjab, lower socio-economic score, and a higher proportion having ever used opium/bhuki were associated with a household's number of anti-HCV+ members. Anti-HCV+ clusters within households and villages in Punjab, India. These data should be used to inform screening efforts.

The burden of hepatitis C virus infection in Punjab, India: A population-based serosurvey.

INTRODUCTION: Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection prevalence is believed to be elevated in Punjab, India; however, state-wide prevalence data are not available. An understanding of HCV prevalence, risk factors and genotype distribution can be used to plan control measures in Punjab. METHODS: A cross-sectional, state-wide, population-based serosurvey using a multi-stage stratified cluster sampling design was conducted October 2013 to April 2014. Children aged ≥5 years and adults were eligible to participate. Demographic and risk behavior data were collected, and serologic specimens were obtained and tested for anti-HCV antibody, HCV Ribonucleic acid (RNA) on anti-HCV positive samples, and HCV genotype. Prevalence estimates and adjusted odds ratios for risk factors were calculated from weighted data and stratified by urban/rural residence. RESULTS: 5,543 individuals participated in the study with an overall weighted anti-HCV prevalence of 3.6% (95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 3.0%-4.2%) and chronic infection (HCV Ribonucleic acid test positive) of 2.6% (95% CI: 2.0%-3.1%). Anti-HCV was associated with being male (adjusted odds ratio 1.52; 95% CI: 1.08-2.14), living in a rural area (adjusted odds ratio 2.53; 95% CI: 1.62-3.95) and was most strongly associated with those aged 40-49 (adjusted odds ratio 40-49 vs. 19-29-year-olds 3.41; 95% CI: 1.90-6.11). Anti-HCV prevalence increased with each blood transfusion received (adjusted odds ratio 1.36; 95% CI: 1.10-1.68) and decreased with increasing education, (adjusted odds ratio 0.37 for graduate-level vs. primary school/no education; 95% CI: 0.16-0.82). Genotype 3 (58%) was most common among infected individuals. DISCUSSION: The study findings, including the overall prevalence of chronic HCV infection, associated risk factors and demographic characteristics, and genotype distribution can guide prevention and control efforts, including treatment provision. In addition to high-risk populations, efforts targeting rural areas and adults aged ≥40 would be the most effective for identifying infected individuals.

Control of hepatitis A through routine vaccination of children.

CONTEXT: The impact of routine hepatitis A vaccination of children living in large communities with elevated disease rates has not been evaluated. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of routine vaccination of children on disease incidence in a community with recurrent hepatitis A epidemics. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Community-based demonstration project conducted from January 12, 1995, through December 31, 2000, in Butte County, California, among children aged 2 to 17 years. INTERVENTION: In 1995, vaccination was offered to children aged 2 to 12 years during vaccination clinics conducted on 2 occasions 6 to 12 months apart at most schools in the county. In 1996-2000, vaccine was distributed to community health care clinicians, who vaccinated eligible children without charge. Vaccine was also available at health department clinics, selected child care centers, and other sites. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Hepatitis A vaccination coverage, hepatitis A incidence, and vaccine effectiveness. RESULTS: During the study period, 29 789 (66.2%) of an estimated 44 982 eligible children received at least 1 vaccine dose; 17 681 (39.3%) received a second dose. The number of hepatitis A cases among the entire county population declined 93.5% during the study period, from 57 cases in 1995 to 4 in 2000, the lowest number of cases reported in the county since hepatitis A surveillance began in 1966. The 2000 incidence rate of 1.9 per 100 000 population was the lowest of any county in the state. Of the 245 cases reported during the 6-year period, 40 (16.3%) occurred among children 17 years of age or younger, of which 16 (40%) occurred in 1995 and only 1 in 2000. One of the 27 case patients eligible for vaccination had been vaccinated, having received the first dose 3 days before symptom onset. The estimated protective vaccine efficacy was 98% (95% confidence interval, 86%-100%). CONCLUSIONS: In this population, hepatitis A vaccine was highly effective in preventing disease among recipients. Childhood vaccination appears to have decreased hepatitis A incidence among children and adults and controlled the disease in a community with recurrent epidemics.

Adolescent immunization practices: a national survey of US physicians.

BACKGROUND: Adolescent immunization rates remain low. Hence, a better understanding of the factors that influence adolescent immunization is needed. OBJECTIVE: To assess the adolescent immunization practices of US physicians. DESIGN AND SETTING: A 24-item survey mailed in 1997 to a national sample of 1480 pediatricians and family physicians living in the United States, randomly selected from the American Medical Association's Master List of Physicians. PARTICIPANTS: Of 1110 physicians (75%) who responded, 761 met inclusion criteria. OUTCOME MEASURES: Immunization practices and policies, use of tracking and recall, opinions about school-based immunizations, and reasons for not providing particular immunizations to eligible adolescents. RESULTS: Seventy-nine percent of physicians reported using protocols for adolescent immunization, and 82% recommended hepatitis B immunization for all eligible adolescents. Those who did not routinely immunize adolescents often cited insufficient insurance coverage for immunizations. While 42% of physicians reported that they review the immunization status of adolescent patients at acute illness visits, only 24% immunized eligible adolescents during such visits. Twenty-one percent used immunization tracking and recall systems. Though 84% preferred that immunizations be administered at their practice, 71% of physicians considered schools, and 63% considered teen clinics to be acceptable alternative adolescent immunization sites. However, many had concerns about continuity of care for adolescents receiving immunizations in school. CONCLUSIONS: Most physicians supported adolescent immunization efforts. Barriers preventing adolescent immunization included financial barriers, record scattering, lack of tracking and recall, and missed opportunities. School-based immunization programs were acceptable to most physicians, despite concerns about continuity of care. Further research is needed to determine whether interventions that have successfully increased infant immunization rates are also effective for adolescents.

Genetic relatedness of hepatitis A virus isolates during a community-wide outbreak.

In 1993-94, a community-wide outbreak of hepatitis A occurred in Stanislaus County, California. Stool specimens collected from a sample of 33 case patients were used to evaluate the duration of hepatitis A virus (HAV) excretion and the genetic relatedness of HAV isolates. Twenty-four percent of the patients had a stool sample positive for HAV antigen by enzyme immunoassay, whereas 91% had at least one stool positive for HAV RNA by RT-PCR amplification. Children were found to excrete low levels of HAV RNA for up to 10 weeks after the onset of symptoms. Analysis of the HAV VP1 amino terminus and VP1/P2A regions showed that a limited number of HAV isolates circulated during the epidemic and the majority of the cases were infected with the same strain.

Progress in coverage with hepatitis B vaccine among US children, 1994-1997.

OBJECTIVES: This study was done to assess progress in hepatitis B vaccination of children from 1994 through 1997. METHODS: We used data from the National Immunization Survey (NIS), a random-digit-dialed telephone survey that includes a mail survey to verify vaccination providers' records. The NIS is conducted in 78 geographic areas (50 states and 28 selected urban areas) in the United States. RESULTS: A total of 32,433 household interviews were completed in the 1997 NIS. An estimated 83.7% of children aged 19 to 35 months received 3 or more doses of hepatitis B vaccine. Coverage with 3 doses was greater (86.7%) among children in states that had day care entry requirements for hepatitis B vaccination than among children in states without such requirements (83.0%) and was greater among children from families with incomes at or above the poverty level (85.0%) than among children below the poverty level (80.6%). Hepatitis B vaccination of children increased from 1994 through 1996, from 41% to 84%, but coverage reached a constant level of 84% to 85% in 1996/97. CONCLUSION: Although substantial progress has been made in fully vaccinating children against hepatitis B, greater efforts are needed to ensure that all infants receive 3 doses of hepatitis B vaccine.

Immunogenicity of hepatitis B Vaccines. Implications for persons at occupational risk of hepatitis B virus infection.

OBJECTIVE: To assess risk factors for decreased immunogenicity among adults vaccinated with hepatitis B vaccine and to determine the importance of differences in immunogenicity between vaccines among health care workers (HCWs). DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial and decision analysis. PARTICIPANTS: HCSw. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Development of seroprotective levels of antibody to hepatitis B surface antigen (anti-HBs) and the number of expected chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infections associated with lack of protection. RESULTS: Overall, 88% of HCWs developed seroprotection. Risk factors associated with failure to develop seroprotection included increasing age, obesity, smoking and male gender (P < .05). Presence of a chronic disease was associated with lack of seroprotection only among persons > or = 40 years of age (P < .05). The two vaccines studied differed in their overall seroprotection rates (90% vs. 86%; P < .05), however, this difference was restricted to persons > or = 40 years of age (87% vs. 81%; P < .01). Among HCWs > or = 40 years of age, the decision analysis found 44 (0.34/100,000 person-years) excess chronic HBV infections over the working life of the cohort associated with use of the less immunogenic vaccine compared to the other. CONCLUSIONS: He patitis B vaccines are highly immunogenic, but have decreased immunogenicity associated with increasing age, obesity, smoking, and male gender; and among older adults, the presence of a chronic disease. One of the two available vaccines is more immunogenic among older adults; however, this finding has little clinical or public health importance. Hepatitis B vaccines should be administered to persons at occupational risk for HBV infection early in their career, preferably while they are still in their training.

Consent for adolescent vaccination: issues and current practices.

To identify and describe implementation of state-level informed consent requirements for adolescent immunizations, current state regulations on informed consent and immunization services for children and adolescents were identified through the LEXIS-NEXIS legal data base. Regulations were coded for informed consent characteristics, consent exemptions, and current immunization requirements. State immunization program directors, project managers, and state hepatitis coordinators were surveyed to catalogue how regulations were implemented and document new policies or regulations under consideration. Parental consent for immunizations is standard practice in 43 states. Most states (n = 34) require separate consent for each injection when more than one injection is required to complete a vaccination, but only for a limited number of medical procedures. Nine states allow adolescents to self-consent for hepatitis B vaccination in sexually transmitted disease clinics and family planning clinics as part of the exemption for minors' receipt of sexual health services. Most states require consent for vaccination services provided to adolescents. Parental consent requirements are a potential barrier to vaccinating adolescents in some settings.

Immunization of adolescents: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Family Physicians, and the American Medical Association.

This report concerning the immunization of adolescents (ie, persons 11-21 years of age, as defined by the American Medical Association [AMA] and the American Academy of Pediatrics [AAP]) is a supplement to previous publications (ie, MMWR 1994;43[No. RR-1] 1-38; the AAP 1994 Red Book: Report of the Committee on Infectious Diseases; Summary of Policy Recommendations for Periodic Health Examination, August 1996 from the American Academy of Family Physicians [AAFP]; and AMA Guidelines for Adolescent Preventive Services [GAPS]: Recommendations and Rationale). This report presents a new strategy to improve the delivery of vaccination services to adolescents and to integrate recommendations for vaccination with other preventive services provided to adolescents. This new strategy emphasizes vaccination of adolescents 11-12 years of age by establishing a routine visit to their health-care providers. Specifically, the purposes of this visit are to a) vaccinate adolescents who have not been previously vaccinated with varicella virus vaccine, hepatitis B vaccine, or the second dose of the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine; b) provide a booster dose of tetanus and diphtheria toxoids; c) administer other vaccines that may be recommended for certain adolescents; and d) provide other recommended preventive services. The recommendations for vaccination of adolescents are based on new or current information for each vaccine. The most recent recommendations from ACIP, AAP, AAFP, and AMA concerning specific vaccines and delivery of preventive services should be consulted for details.

Adolescent immunization: focus on implementation.

On March 11-12, 1996, a workshop on how to implement new adolescent immunization (AI) recommendations was held in Atlanta, Ga. Sponsored by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, it was a collaborative effort of the National Immunization Program, the Division of Adolescent and School Health/National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, and the Hepatitis Branch/National Center for Infectious Diseases. The workshop brought together organizations and individuals interested in adolescent health and immunizations so they could address how new AI recommendations can be implemented most effectively. This article offers an overview of their discussions and suggestions, including issues of cooperation, education, legislation, and AI program development among health provider organizations, health department, schools, community groups and various other agencies relating to adolescent health services.

Immunization of adolescents.

This report concerning the immunization of adolescents (i.e., persons 11 to 21 years of age, as defined by the American Medical Association [AMA] and the American Academy of Pediatrics [AAP]) is a supplement to previous publications (i.e., MMWR 1994;43[No. RR-1]1-38; the AAP 1994 Red Book: Report of the Committee on Infectious Diseases; Summary of Policy Recommendations for Periodic Health Examination, August 1996 from the American Academy of Family Physicians; and AMA Guidelines for Adolescent Preventive Services: Recommendations and Rationale). This report presents a new strategy to improve the delivery of vaccination services to adolescents and to integrate recommendations for vaccination with other preventive services provided to adolescents. This new strategy emphasizes vaccination of adolescents 11 to 12 years of age by establishing a routine visit to their health care providers. Specifically, the purposes of this visit are to (1) vaccinate adolescents who have not been previously vaccinated with varicella virus vaccine, hepatitis B vaccine, or the second dose of the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine; (2) provide a booster dose of tetanus and diphtheria toxoids; (3) administer other vaccines that may be recommended for certain adolescents, and (4) provide other recommended preventive services. The recommendations for vaccination of adolescents are based on new or current information for each vaccine.

Transmission of hepatitis B virus to multiple patients from a surgeon without evidence of inadequate infection control.

BACKGROUND: Although about 1 percent of surgeons are infected with hepatitis B virus (HBV), transmission from surgeons to patients is thought to be uncommon. In July 1992, a 47-year-old woman became ill with acute hepatitis B after undergoing a thymectomy in which a thoracic-surgery resident who had had acute hepatitis B six months earlier assisted. METHODS: To determine whether the surgeon transmitted HBV to this patient and others, we conducted chart reviews, interviews, and serologic testing of thoracic-surgery patients at the two hospitals where the surgeon worked from July 1991 to July 1992. Hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) subtypes and DNA sequences from the surgeon and from infected patients were determined. RESULTS: Of 144 susceptible patients in whose surgery the infected surgeon participated, 19 had evidence of recent HBV infection (13 percent). One of the hospitals was selected for additional study, and none of the 124 susceptible patients of the other thoracic surgeons at this hospital had evidence of recent HBV infection (relative risk, infinity; 95 percent confidence interval, 4.7 to infinity). No evidence was found for any common source of HBV other than the infected surgeon. The HBsAg subtype and the partial HBV DNA sequences from the surgeon were identical to those in the infected patients. Transmission of the infection was associated with cardiac transplantation (relative risk, 4.9; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.5 to 15.5) but not with other surgical procedures. The surgeon was positive for hepatitis B e antigen and had a high serum HBV DNA concentration (15 ng per milliliter). Our investigations identified no deficiencies in the surgeon's infection-control practices. CONCLUSIONS: In this outbreak there was surgeon-to-patient HBV transmission despite apparent compliance with recommended infection-control practices. We could not identify any specific events that led to transmission.