Evaluation of 17 years of MERIN (Meningitis and Encephalitis register in Lower Saxony, Germany) surveillance system: participants acceptability survey, completeness and timeliness of data.

BACKGROUND: A Meningitis and Encephalitis Surveillance (MERIN) was implemented in 2003 in Lower Saxony, Germany as an alternative to acute flaccid paralyses surveillance, as the latter did not reach WHO sensitivity criteria. The system provides information on circulating enterovirus (EV) serotypes by focussing on patients with suspected aseptic meningitis, encephalitis or acute flaccid paralysis and contributes to the national surveillance in documenting polio free status. MERIN is based on voluntary participation of hospitals. Therefore, our evaluation focusses on acceptability of the system's objectives and performance, and identifying areas for improvement. METHODS: To assess acceptability, 32 contributing hospitals were invited to an online-based survey (11/2021 to 01/2022) to rate the MERIN objectives, laboratory's performance, their workload, modes of processes and communication. Ideas for improvement were collected in open fields. In addition, data completeness and timeliness of laboratory diagnostics were assessed. RESULTS: Of 32 hospitals, 21 responded (66% response rate), sending 30 questionnaires, 25 from pediatric and 5 from neurological departments. High levels of satisfaction with the communication (≥ 96%), timeliness (≥ 81%), and distribution of the results (≥ 85%) were reported, 97% of participants judged the required workload as adequate. The median proportion of eligible patients included in MERIN was 75%. Participants gave rapid and reliable diagnostic testing the highest priority (96%), while monitoring of Germany's polio-free status was rated the lowest (61%). Providing medical reports digitally as well as regular updates about circulating EV serotypes were identified as areas for improvement. Data completeness of selected variables ranged from 78.3 to 99.9%. Median time between sample collection and arrival at laboratory was 2 days [IQR 1-3], EV diagnostics via PCR took one day [IQR 0-6] and EV isolation on cell culture 11 days [IQR 10-13]. CONCLUSION: MERIN is a highly accepted surveillance system. Its quality was enhanced further by addressing the suggested improvements such as regular reports on circulating EV serotypes and facilitating digital access to laboratory results. Our results emphasise the importance of recognizing and considering participants' motivations and expectations, and addressing their priorities, even if this is not the surveillance system's main focus. This approach can be applied to surveillance systems of other non-mandatory notifiable diseases.

[Brushing Teeth and Acute Respiratory Infections in Day Care Facilities: An Ecological Study in Selected Regions of Lower Saxony, Germany (2013-2018)]. / Zähneputzen und akute respiratorische Infektionen in Kindertageseinrichtungen (ZINFEKT): Eine ökologische Studie in ausgewählten Regionen Niedersachsens (2013­2018).

AIM OF THE STUDY: Dental group prophylaxis in day-care centers with teeth brushing as one of its components is intended to reduce caries incidence and promote dental health. However, various barriers can hinder implementation of this preventive measure. One concern relates to an increased risk of transmission of acute respiratory infections (ARI) in day-care centers. The ZINFEKT study aimed at determining whether and to what extent there are differences in the occurrence of ARI between day-care centers that implement vs. those that do not implement teeth brushing. METHODS: In an ecological study, 2013-2018 data from the ARI surveillance of the Public Health Agency of Lower Saxony were merged with information from the Dental Services on teeth brushing for n=33 day-care facilities from the urban municipality of Braunschweig, the region of Hannover, and the administrative district of Osnabrück (all Lower Saxony, Germany). Following the concept of patient days from hospital infection surveillance, "ill child weeks" were specified as observational units, defined as weeks for which an ARI had been reported for a registered child. Besides cross-tabulations, relative risks for ill child weeks by teeth brushing and Breslow-Day Tests for interactions with area, size of day-care center, ARI season and time slot with ARI seasons were computed. RESULTS: Overall, the ARI-rate, defined at the proportion of ill child weeks, was 4.6% higher in day-care centers in which teeth brushing took place, vs. centers in which this measure was not implemented (17.9 vs. 13.3%, p<0.0001). In analyses stratified by the geographic and temporal co-variables, the direction of this difference did not change (with one exception: day-care centers with 50 or less registered children) . CONCLUSION: The assumption that regular teeth brushing is associated with higher ARI rates in day-care centers does seem to have an empirical basis. However, despite the study's limitations (primarily its ecological design and possibly limited representativeness of the day-care centers), the identified difference - due both to its magnitude and possibly improvable hygiene compliance - to our assessment does not speak against brushing teeth as a component of dental group prophylaxis in day-care centers.