Collaborations and Networks Within Communities for Improved Utilization of Primary Healthcare Centers: On the Road to Universal Health Coverage.

Objectives: Community involvement depends on the level of linked and targeted activities for health by community members. This study examines the collaborations employed within communities to ensure sustainable access and improved use of healthcare in the community. Methods: This study was conducted in rural and urban local government areas in Anambra, Kano, and Akwa-Ibom, Nigeria. About 90 in-depth interviews and 12 focus group discussions were conducted with community stakeholders and service users. The findings were transcribed and coded via thematic analysis, guided by the Expanded Health Systems framework. Results: Various horizontal collaborations in communities foster increased use of PHC services; promoting community health. Major horizontal collaborations in these communities were community-led, primary health facility-led, and Individual-led collaborations. Their actions revolved around advocacy, building and renovating PHC centers, equipping facilities, and sensitization to educate community members on the need to utilize services at PHC centers. Conclusion: Strategic involvements and collaborations of local actors within communities give rise to improvements in the utilization of primary healthcare centres, reportedly resulting in improved access to PHC healthcare services for community members.

A cross-sectional national investigation of COVID-19 outbreaks in nurseries during rapid spread of the Alpha (B.1.1.7) variant of SARS-CoV-2 in England.

BACKGROUND: In England, the emergence the more transmissible SARS-CoV-2 variant Alpha (B.1.1.7) led to a third national lockdown from December 2020, including restricted attendance at schools. Nurseries, however, remained fully open. COVID-19 outbreaks (≥ 2 laboratory-confirmed cases within 14 days) in nurseries were investigated to assess the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and cumulative incidence in staff and children over a three-month period when community SARS-CoV-2 infections rates were high and the Alpha variant was spreading rapidly across England. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional national investigation of COVID-19 outbreaks in nurseries across England. Nurseries reporting a COVID-19 outbreak to PHE between November 2020 and January 2021 were requested to complete a questionnaire about their outbreak. RESULTS: Three hundred and twenty-four nurseries, comprising 1% (324/32,852) of nurseries in England, reported a COVID-19 outbreak. Of the 315 (97%) nurseries contacted, 173 (55%) reported 1,657 SARS-CoV-2 cases, including 510 (31%) children and 1,147 (69%) staff. A child was the index case in 45 outbreaks (26%) and staff in 125 (72%) outbreaks. Overall, children had an incidence rate of 3.50% (95%CI, 3.21-3.81%) and was similar irrespective of whether the index case was a child (3.55%; 95%CI, 3.01-4.19%) or staff (3.44%; 95%CI, 3.10-3.82%). Among staff, cumulative incidence was lower if the index case was a child (26.28%; 95%CI, 23.54-29.21%%) compared to a staff member (32.98%; 95%CI, 31.19-34.82%), with the highest cumulative incidence when the index case was also a staff member (37.52%; 95%CI, 35.39-39.70%). Compared to November 2020, outbreak sizes and cumulative incidence was higher in January 2021, when the Alpha variant predominated. Nationally, SARS-CoV-2 infection rates in < 5 year-olds remained low and followed trends in older age-groups, increasing during December 2020 and declining thereafter. CONCLUSIONS: In this cross-sectional study of COVID-19 outbreaks in nurseries, one in three staff were affected compared to one in thirty children. There was some evidence of increased transmissibility and higher cumulative incidence associated with the Alpha variant, highlighting the importance of maintaining a low level of community infections.

COVID-19 outbreaks following full reopening of primary and secondary schools in England: Cross-sectional national surveillance, November 2020.

BACKGROUND: The full reopening of schools in September 2020 was associated with an increase in COVID-19 cases and outbreaks in educational settings across England. METHODS: Primary and secondary schools reporting an outbreak (≥2 laboratory-confirmed cases within 14 days) to Public Health England (PHE) between 31 August and 18 October 2020 were contacted in November 2020 to complete an online questionnaire. INTERPRETATION: There were 969 school outbreaks reported to PHE, comprising 2% (n = 450) of primary schools and 10% (n = 519) of secondary schools in England. Of the 369 geographically-representative schools contacted, 179 completed the questionnaire (100 primary schools, 79 secondary schools) and 2,314 cases were reported. Outbreaks were larger and across more year groups in secondary schools than in primary schools. Teaching staff were more likely to be the index case in primary (48/100, 48%) than secondary (25/79, 32%) school outbreaks (P = 0.027). When an outbreak occurred, attack rates were higher in staff (881/17,362; 5.07; 95%CI, 4.75-5.41) than students, especially primary school teaching staff (378/3852; 9.81%; 95%CI, 8.90-10.82%) compared to secondary school teaching staff (284/7146; 3.97%; 95%CI, 3.79-5.69%). Secondary school students (1105/91,919; 1.20%; 95%CI, 1.13-1.28%) had higher attack rates than primary school students (328/39,027; 0.84%; 95%CI, 0.75-0.94%). CONCLUSIONS: A higher proportion of secondary schools than primary schools reported a COVID-19 outbreak and experienced larger outbreaks across multiple school year groups. The higher attack rate among teaching staff during an outbreak, especially in primary schools, suggests that additional protective measures may be needed. FUNDING: PHE.

The impact of social and physical distancing measures on COVID-19 activity in England: findings from a multi-tiered surveillance system.

BackgroundA multi-tiered surveillance system based on influenza surveillance was adopted in the United Kingdom in the early stages of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic to monitor different stages of the disease. Mandatory social and physical distancing measures (SPDM) were introduced on 23 March 2020 to attempt to limit transmission.AimTo describe the impact of SPDM on COVID-19 activity as detected through the different surveillance systems.MethodsData from national population surveys, web-based indicators, syndromic surveillance, sentinel swabbing, respiratory outbreaks, secondary care admissions and mortality indicators from the start of the epidemic to week 18 2020 were used to identify the timing of peaks in surveillance indicators relative to the introduction of SPDM. This timing was compared with median time from symptom onset to different stages of illness and levels of care or interactions with healthcare services.ResultsThe impact of SPDM was detected within 1 week through population surveys, web search indicators and sentinel swabbing reported by onset date. There were detectable impacts on syndromic surveillance indicators for difficulty breathing, influenza-like illness and COVID-19 coding at 2, 7 and 12 days respectively, hospitalisations and critical care admissions (both 12 days), laboratory positivity (14 days), deaths (17 days) and nursing home outbreaks (4 weeks).ConclusionThe impact of SPDM on COVID-19 activity was detectable within 1 week through community surveillance indicators, highlighting their importance in early detection of changes in activity. Community swabbing surveillance may be increasingly important as a specific indicator, should circulation of seasonal respiratory viruses increase.

SARS-CoV-2 infection in London, England: changes to community point prevalence around lockdown time, March-May 2020.

BACKGROUND: The UK has been one of the European countries most affected by COVID-19 pandemic. The UK implemented a lockdown in March 2020, when testing policy at the time was focusing on hospitalised cases. Limited information is therefore available on the impact of the lockdown on point prevalence in the community. We assessed COVID-19 point prevalence in London between early April and early May 2020, which approximately reflect infection around the time of the lockdown and 3-5 weeks into lockdown. METHODS: We tested 1064 participants of a community surveillance cohort for acute COVID-19 infection using PCR in London in April and May 2020 and described positivity as well as characteristics and symptoms of the participants. RESULTS: Point prevalence decreased from 2.2% (95% CI 1.4 to 3.5) in early April to 0.2% (95% CI 0.03 to 1.6) in early May. 22% of those who tested positive in April were asymptomatic. Extrapolation from reports of confirmed cases suggest that 5-7.6% of total infections were confirmed by testing during this period. CONCLUSION: COVID-19 point prevalence in the community sharply decreased after lockdown was implemented. This study is based on a small sample and regular seroprevalence studies are needed to better characterise population-level immunity.

Are People Optimistically Biased about the Risk of COVID-19 Infection? Lessons from the First Wave of the Pandemic in Europe.

Unrealistic optimism, the underestimation of one's risk of experiencing harm, has been investigated extensively to understand better and predict behavioural responses to health threats. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, a relative dearth of research existed in this domain regarding epidemics, which is surprising considering that this optimistic bias has been associated with a lack of engagement in protective behaviours critical in fighting twenty-first-century, emergent, infectious diseases. The current study addresses this gap in the literature by investigating whether people demonstrated optimism bias during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe, how this changed over time, and whether unrealistic optimism was negatively associated with protective measures. Taking advantage of a pre-existing international participative influenza surveillance network (n = 12,378), absolute and comparative unrealistic optimism were measured at three epidemic stages (pre-, early, peak), and across four countries-France, Italy, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. Despite differences in culture and health response, similar patterns were observed across all four countries. The prevalence of unrealistic optimism appears to be influenced by the particular epidemic context. Paradoxically, whereas absolute unrealistic optimism decreased over time, comparative unrealistic optimism increased, suggesting that whilst people became increasingly accurate in assessing their personal risk, they nonetheless overestimated that for others. Comparative unrealistic optimism was negatively associated with the adoption of protective behaviours, which is worrying, given that these preventive measures are critical in tackling the spread and health burden of COVID-19. It is hoped these findings will inspire further research into sociocognitive mechanisms involved in risk appraisal.

Unsupervised extraction of epidemic syndromes from participatory influenza surveillance self-reported symptoms.

Seasonal influenza surveillance is usually carried out by sentinel general practitioners (GPs) who compile weekly reports based on the number of influenza-like illness (ILI) clinical cases observed among visited patients. This traditional practice for surveillance generally presents several issues, such as a delay of one week or more in releasing reports, population biases in the health-seeking behaviour, and the lack of a common definition of ILI case. On the other hand, the availability of novel data streams has recently led to the emergence of non-traditional approaches for disease surveillance that can alleviate these issues. In Europe, a participatory web-based surveillance system called Influenzanet represents a powerful tool for monitoring seasonal influenza epidemics thanks to aid of self-selected volunteers from the general population who monitor and report their health status through Internet-based surveys, thus allowing a real-time estimate of the level of influenza circulating in the population. In this work, we propose an unsupervised probabilistic framework that combines time series analysis of self-reported symptoms collected by the Influenzanet platforms and performs an algorithmic detection of groups of symptoms, called syndromes. The aim of this study is to show that participatory web-based surveillance systems are capable of detecting the temporal trends of influenza-like illness even without relying on a specific case definition. The methodology was applied to data collected by Influenzanet platforms over the course of six influenza seasons, from 2011-2012 to 2016-2017, with an average of 34,000 participants per season. Results show that our framework is capable of selecting temporal trends of syndromes that closely follow the ILI incidence rates reported by the traditional surveillance systems in the various countries (Pearson correlations ranging from 0.69 for Italy to 0.88 for the Netherlands, with the sole exception of Ireland with a correlation of 0.38). The proposed framework was able to forecast quite accurately the ILI trend of the forthcoming influenza season (2016-2017) based only on the available information of the previous years (2011-2016). Furthermore, to broaden the scope of our approach, we applied it both in a forecasting fashion to predict the ILI trend of the 2016-2017 influenza season (Pearson correlations ranging from 0.60 for Ireland and UK, and 0.85 for the Netherlands) and also to detect gastrointestinal syndrome in France (Pearson correlation of 0.66). The final result is a near-real-time flexible surveillance framework not constrained by any specific case definition and capable of capturing the heterogeneity in symptoms circulation during influenza epidemics in the various European countries.

Frequency and correlates of culture-positive infection with Neisseria gonorrhoeae in England: a review of sentinel surveillance data.

OBJECTIVES: Reference laboratories are increasingly using more sensitive rapid molecular techniques, such as nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs), to diagnose infections with Neisseria gonorrhoeae. We determined the proportion of patients at sentinel genitourinary medicine clinics in England whose NAAT-positive diagnoses were also culture-positive for N. gonorrhoeae, and investigated whether they differed from those that were not. METHODS: Behavioural and clinical data from all NAAT-positive patients reported from 23 clinics included in the Gonoccocal Resistance to Antimicrobials Surveillance Programme from July to September 2012 were included in this analysis. Unadjusted and adjusted associations between patient characteristics and culture-positive infection with N. gonorrhoeae were determined. RESULTS: Of 3076 NAAT-positive patients, 46.4% had culture-positive infections. Most NAAT-positive patients were <35 years old (73.0%), white (67.9%), and men who had sex with men (60.1%). Women and men who had sex with men were less likely than heterosexual men to have culture-positive infections (adjusted OR (95% CI) 0.53 (0.41 to 0.68), p<0.001; and 0.74 (0.59 to 0.93), p=0.010, respectively), while those who were symptomatic (4.61 (3.92 to 5.42), p<0.001), and those presenting with infection at multiple sites (2.15 (1.76 to 2.62), p<0.001) were more likely to have culture-positive infections. CONCLUSIONS: Although gonococcal isolates were available from almost half of the NAAT-positive patients, culture was not attempted or may have failed in the remainder. Patients with culture-positive isolates were not representative of all NAAT-positive patients. Routine culture is necessary for monitoring emerging antimicrobial resistance and to inform gonorrhoea treatment guidelines.

Can previous first-line therapies for Neisseria gonorrhoeae be targeted to specific patient subgroups to treat gonorrhea?

BACKGROUND: Gonorrhea treatment is challenging because of the emergence of resistance, treatment failure with existing drugs, and the lack of alternative agents. This study investigates the feasibility of targeting previously recommended antimicrobials to specific population subgroups where the prevalence of infection susceptible to these antimicrobials is above the World Health Organization cautionary treatment threshold of 95%. METHODS: Descriptive data from the Gonococcal Resistance to Antimicrobials Surveillance Programme for England and Wales were analyzed to investigate patient characteristics associated with infection with susceptible isolates using univariate and multivariable analyses. RESULTS: Of 6173 isolates from 2007 to 2011, 4684 (82%) were susceptible to penicillin, 3899 (68%) to ciprofloxacin, and 5240 (91%) to cefixime. All subgroups of the MSM population had fewer than 95% of isolates susceptible to penicillin, ciprofloxacin, or cefixime. Higher proportions of isolates from heterosexual patient subgroups were susceptible to these antimicrobials. Multivariable models identified the following associations between patient characteristics and infection with susceptible isolates: patients aged 13 to 24 years (penicillin: 92.3% susceptible adjusted odds ratio and associated 95% confidence interval [aOR CI] 1.84-2.97; ciprofloxacin: 88.3%, aOR CI 2.22-3.39; cefixime: 98.7%, aOR CI 1.29-3.52) patients of black ethnicity (penicillin: 93.9%, aOR CI 2.72-4.91; ciprofloxacin: 92.0%, aOR CI 3.94-6.7; cefixime: 99.1%, aOR CI 1.78-6.4), and patients with concurrent chlamydia (penicillin: 93.9%, aOR CI 1.8-3.22; ciprofloxacin: 91.7%, aOR CI 2.71-4.58; cefixime: 99.0%, aOR CI 1.27-4.54). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that of the previous first-line therapies, cefixime would be the only antimicrobial suitable for use for infection in heterosexual patients alone.

Decreased susceptibility to cephalosporins among gonococci: data from the Gonococcal Resistance to Antimicrobials Surveillance Programme (GRASP) in England and Wales, 2007-2011.

BACKGROUND: Effective treatment of gonorrhoea is fundamental to public health control; however, the ability of Neisseria gonorrhoeae to successively develop resistance to different treatments has hampered control efforts. The extended-spectrum cephalosporins--cefixime and ceftriaxone--have been recommended in the UK for treatment of gonorrhoea since 2005. We looked at surveillance data from England and Wales to ascertain the current usefulness of these drugs and to inform changes to national treatment guidelines. METHODS: We obtained data from the Gonococcal Resistance to Antimicrobials Surveillance Programme (GRASP) for patients attending 26 genitourinary medicine clinics in England and Wales between 2007 and 2011. We did analyses with univariate and multivariable logistic regression methods to identify trends in susceptibility to cephalosporins and risk factors associated with infection with isolates with decreased susceptibility to cefixime, and we assessed changes in prescribing practices. We did molecular typing to investigate genetic relatedness of non-susceptible isolates. FINDINGS: The prevalence of decreased susceptibility to both cefixime and ceftriaxone rose between 2007 and 2010 but was more noticeable for cefixime (an increase from 1·5% in 2007 to 17·1% in 2010), with a bimodal distribution of minimum inhibitory concentration recorded between 2009 and 2010. By multivariable analysis, isolates with decreased susceptibility to cefixime were associated with infection in men who have sex with men (odds ratio 5·47, 95% CI 3·99-7·48; p<0·0001) and year of isolation (in 2010, 13·08, 7·49-22·8; p<0·0001). Such isolates had a largely clonal population, with most belonging to genogroup G1407 and harbouring the penA mosaic gene. Data from 2011 showed a significant decline in prevalence of isolates with decreased cefixime susceptibility, falling from 17·1% in 2010 to 10·8% in 2011 (p<0·0001), concomitant with the change in prescribing practice in 2010 from cefixime to ceftriaxone plus azithromycin. INTERPRETATION: Guidance for treatment of gonorrhoea in England and Wales was changed in 2010 to prolong the use of cephalosporins. The decline in prevalence of isolates with decreased cefixime susceptibility cannot be attributed unequivocally to this change in prescribing practice; however, the association is striking. FUNDING: Department of Health (England), Public Health England.

Monitoring the emergence of community transmission of influenza A/H1N1 2009 in England: a cross sectional opportunistic survey of self sampled telephone callers to NHS Direct.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate ascertainment of the onset of community transmission of influenza A/H1N1 2009 (swine flu) in England during the earliest phase of the epidemic through comparing data from two surveillance systems. DESIGN: Cross sectional opportunistic survey. STUDY SAMPLES: Results from self samples by consenting patients who had called the NHS Direct telephone health line with cold or flu symptoms, or both, and results from Health Protection Agency (HPA) regional microbiology laboratories on patients tested according to the clinical algorithm for the management of suspected cases of swine flu. SETTING: Six regions of England between 24 May and 30 June 2009. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Proportion of specimens with laboratory evidence of influenza A/H1N1 2009. RESULTS: Influenza A/H1N1 2009 infections were detected in 91 (7%) of the 1385 self sampled specimens tested. In addition, eight instances of influenza A/H3 infection and two cases of influenza B infection were detected. The weekly rate of change in the proportions of infected individuals according to self obtained samples closely matched the rate of increase in the proportions of infected people reported by HPA regional laboratories. Comparing the data from both systems showed that local community transmission was occurring in London and the West Midlands once HPA regional laboratories began detecting 100 or more influenza A/H1N1 2009 infections, or a proportion positive of over 20% of those tested, each week. CONCLUSIONS: Trends in the proportion of patients with influenza A/H1N1 2009 across regions detected through clinical management were mirrored by the proportion of NHS Direct callers with laboratory confirmed infection. The initial concern that information from HPA regional laboratory reports would be too limited because it was based on testing patients with either travel associated risk or who were contacts of other influenza cases was unfounded. Reports from HPA regional laboratories could be used to recognise the extent to which local community transmission was occurring.