No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
2009 H1N1 Influenza Pandemic
Abstract
The 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic took health care workers worldwide by surprise. Early in the course of the pandemic it was determined that children and pregnant women were at high risk of increased morbidity and mortality from the novel influenza virus. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and state and local public health officials quickly rallied to develop treatment guidelines for the new strain of influenza A, including emergency approvals for off-label use of some antiviral drugs. Prevention of the spread of influenza via vaccination and environmental controls is critical to the health of children. The 2009 H1N1 influenza virus emerged too late to be included in the 2009/2010 seasonal influenza vaccine, so production of a monovalent vaccine was set in motion. Five months from when the first cases of novel H1N1 appeared in Mexico and the United States, a vaccine was being distributed to high-risk patients. Looking ahead to the 2010/2011 influenza season, it is difficult to predict 2009 H1N1 activity. The 2010/2011 seasonal influenza vaccine will include the 2009 H1N1 strain, so it is critical to get all children vaccinated early in the flu season.
... However, some factors have been identified as motivators for return visits including previous experience with ILI [13], personal beliefs about vaccination [14,15], and previous error in the diagnosis of an illness or the progression of an illness [16][17][18], and widespread OJPHI report of morbidity and mortality during the pandemic [19]. In contrast, researchers have also noted that up to 73% of patients that showed up at ED for H1N1 influenza fear were the "worried well" and that over 95% of the presenting concerns were minor or nonexistent [20]. ...
... Unfortunately, our interpretation is limited by the absence of data on the reasons for the patients' return visits to the clinic including the roles that media coverage may have played. However, previous research noted that up to 73% of patients that showed up at ED for H1N1 influenza fear were the "worried well" and that over 95% of the presenting concerns were minor or nonexistent [20]. ...
Background During the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic (pH1N1), the proportion of outpatient visits to emergency departments, clinics and hospitals became elevated especially during the early months of the pandemic due to surges in sick, ‘worried well’ or returning patients seeking care. We determined the prevalence of return visits to a multispecialty clinic during the 2009 H1N1 influenza pandemic and identify subgroups at risk for return visits using model-based recursive partitioning. Methods This was a retrospective analysis of ILI-related medical care visits to multispecialty clinic in Houston, Texas obtained as part of the Houston Health Department Influenza Sentinel Surveillance Project (ISSP) during the 2009 H1N1 pandemic influenza (April 2009 – April 2010). The data comprised of 2680 individuals who made a total of 2960 clinic visits. Return visit was defined as any visit following the index visit after the wash-out phase prior to the study period. We applied nominal logistic regression and recursive partition models to determine the independent predictors and the response probabilities of return visits. The sensitivity and specificity of the outcomes probabilities were determined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Results Overall, 4.56% (Prob. 0.0%-17.5%) of the cohort had return visits with significant variations observed attributed to age group (76.0%) and type of vaccine received by patients (18.4%) and Influenza A (pH1N1) test result (5.6%). Patients in age group 0-4 years were 9 times (aOR: 8.77, 95%CI: 3.39-29.95, p<0.0001) more likely than those who were 50+ years to have return visits. Similarly, patients who received either seasonal flu (aOR: 1.59, 95% CI 1.01-2.50, p=0.047) or pH1N1 (aOR: 1.74, 95%CI: 1.09-2.75, p=0.022) vaccines were about twice more likely to have return visits compared to those with no vaccination history. Model-based recursive partitioning yielded 19 splits with patients in subgroup I (patients of age group 0-4 years, who tested positive for pH1N1, and received both seasonal flu and pH1N1 vaccines) having the highest risk of return visits (Prob.=17.5%). The area under the curve (AUC) for both return and non-return visits was 72.9%, indicating a fairly accurate classification of the two groups. Conclusions Return visits in our cohort was more prevalent among children and young adults and those that received either seasonal flu or pH1N1 or both vaccines. Understanding the dynamics in care-seeking behavior during pandemic would assist policymakers with appropriate resource allocation, and in the design of initiatives aimed at mitigating surges and recurrent utilization of the healthcare system. Keywords: Model-based recursive partitioning, subgroup analysis, Influenza-like-illness, H1N1, influenza pandemic, care-seeking behavior, return visit
... This virus, also called the bird flu virus or Avian Influenza, was the responsible of more than 200 human deaths until 2007 (Otte et al 2007). During 2009, a swine-origin virus (H1N1) appeared, infecting an estimated population of 39 to 80 million people worldwide (Woo, 2010). According to Akhtar (2013), these two diseases constitute a clear example of the health risk that animal farms, especially factory farms, represent to humans. ...
In 2015, the United Nations reported that around 70% of water used by humans was allocated to agriculture, which, due to the extensive and inappropriate practices, constitutes one of the main causes of nature depletion, deforestation, soil erosion, and water pollution.
Animal farming is considered to be one of the most demanding industries in terms of land, water, supplementary food, and other resources. Studies have demonstrated that the volume of water necessary to produce vegetables is far less than that required to produce meat. For example, a kilogram of vegetables can be grown with just 2% of the water required for a kilogram of beef, or 7% of that required for a kilogram of chicken (Mekonnen and Hoeskstra 2012 ). Livestock constitutes an environmentally expensive industry. A change in the matrix of production would be driven by the consumer's preference to consume plant‐based food products over animal‐based food products. This would alleviate the pressure exerted by human activity on land and aquatic ecosystems.
Consumers' food preferences are subject to a large number of variables, including historical, social, and educational influences. The consumption of plant‐based food is associated with weakness, poverty (largely in developing countries), lack of taste, disease, or even luxury (mainly in developed countries). Consequently, there is a tendency to reject the idea of adopting plant‐based diets.
In this study, it was found that it is possible to implement substantial change in the current models of food production, which are focused on animal farming practices, to tackle world's water issues by supporting behavioural change processes that influence food choices in consumers in favour of more sustainable ones.
In addition, it was found that despite the cultural challenges, it is possible to stimulate a transformation of the production lines. In doing so, this transformation would support economic development and cultural plasticity.
... Vaccination of children at a young age against influenza viruses is effective in reducing influenza-related morbidity and mortality among children [7][8][9]. Nonetheless, every year a majority of American adults do not obtain flu vaccinations. This could result in a serious societal health problem because vaccination avoidance by parents may lead to a lower vaccination rates among their children, and such avoidance can increase the family's risk of flu infection [10,11]. ...
During the H1N1 pandemic in 2009-10, the vaccination behavior of parents played a critical role in preventing and containing the spread of the disease and the subsequent health outcomes among children. Several studies have examined the relationship between parents' health communication behaviors and vaccinations for children in general. Little is known, however, about the link between parents' health communication behaviors and the vaccination of their children against the H1N1 virus, and their level of vaccine-related knowledge. We drew on a national survey among parents with at least one child less than 18 years of age (n=639) to investigate Parents' H1N1-related health communication behaviors including sources of information, media exposure, information-seeking behaviors, H1N1-related knowledge, and neighborhood social capital, as well as the H1N1 vaccination rates of their children. Findings showed that there is a significant association between the degree at which parents obtained H1N1 vaccination for their children and health communication variables: watching the national television news and actively seeking H1N1 information. And this association was moderated by the extent of the parents' H1N1-related knowledge. In addition, the parents' degree of neighborhood social capital mediated the association between H1N1 knowledge of the parents and H1N1 vaccination acceptance for their children. We found, compared to those with a low-level of neighborhood social capital, parents who have a high-level of neighborhood social capital are more likely to vaccinate their children. These findings suggest that it is necessary to design a strategic health communication campaign segmented by parent health communication behaviors.
... In March, 2009, a new influenza virus, A(H1N1), appeared in Mexico and rapidly spread to several countries [1]. The first French cases were identified on May 1, in travelers returning from Mexico. ...
In July, 2009, French health authorities, like those in many other countries, decided to embark on a mass vaccination campaign against the pandemic A(H1N1) influenza. Private general practitioners (GPs) were not involved in this campaign. We studied GPs' pandemic vaccine (pvaccine) uptake, quantified the relative contribution of its potential explanatory factors and studied whether their own vaccination choice was correlated with their recommendations to patients about pvaccination.
In this cross-sectional telephone survey, professional investigators interviewed an existing panel of randomly selected private GPs (N = 1431; response rate at inclusion in the panel: 36.8%; participation rate in the survey: 100%). The main outcome variable was GPs' own pvaccine uptake. We used an averaging multi-model approach to quantify the relative contribution of factors associated with their vaccination. The pvaccine uptake rate was 61% (95%CI = 58.3-63.3). Four independent factors contributed the most to this rate (partial Nagelkerke's R(2)): history of previous vaccination against seasonal influenza (14.5%), perception of risks and efficacy of the pvaccine (10.8%), opinions regarding the organization of the vaccination campaign (7.1%), and perception of the pandemic's severity (5.2%). Overall, 71.3% (95%CI = 69.0-73.6) of the participants recommended pvaccination to young adults at risk and 40.1% (95%CI = 37.6-42.7) to other young adults. GPs' own pvaccination was strongly predictive of their recommendation to both young adults at risk (OR = 9.6; 95%CI = 7.2-12.6) and those not at risk (OR = 8.5; 95%CI = 6.4-11.4).
These results suggest that around 60% of French private GPs followed French authorities' recommendations about vaccination of health care professionals against the A(H1N1) influenza. They pinpoint priority levers for improving preparedness for future influenza pandemics. Besides encouraging GPs' own uptake of regular vaccination against seasonal influenza, providing GPs with clear information about the risks and efficacy of any new pvaccine and involving them in the organization of any future vaccine campaign may improve their pvaccine uptake.
... Although all three outbreaks had significant local impacts, the influenza pandemic clearly demonstrated the global impact of zoonotic disease transmission. Despite years of enhanced surveillance for H5N1 and other highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI), the rapid spread of a new strain of H1N1 from initial identification in April 2009 into a global pandemic 6 weeks later on 11 June surprised many public health officials (Woo, 2010). Although commendable, vaccine production and distribution efforts were insufficient to meet global demands (Collin and de Radigues, 2009; Zigmond, 2009). ...
The Armed Forces Health Surveillance Center (AFHSC), Division of Global Emerging Infections Surveillance and Response System conducts disease surveillance through a global network of US Department of Defense research laboratories and partnerships with foreign ministries of agriculture, health and livestock development in over 90 countries worldwide. In 2010, AFHSC supported zoonosis survey efforts were organized into four main categories: (i) development of field assays for animal disease surveillance during deployments and in resource limited environments, (ii) determining zoonotic disease prevalence in high-contact species which may serve as important reservoirs of diseases and sources of transmission, (iii) surveillance in high-risk human populations which are more likely to become exposed and subsequently infected with zoonotic pathogens and (iv) surveillance at the human-animal interface examining zoonotic disease prevalence and transmission within and between human and animal populations. These efforts have aided in the detection, identification and quantification of the burden of zoonotic diseases such as anthrax, brucellosis, Crimean Congo haemorrhagic fever, dengue fever, Hantaan virus, influenza, Lassa fever, leptospirosis, melioidosis, Q fever, Rift Valley fever, sandfly fever Sicilian virus, sandfly fever Naples virus, tuberculosis and West Nile virus, which are of military and public health importance. Future zoonotic surveillance efforts will seek to develop local capacity for zoonotic surveillance focusing on high risk populations at the human-animal interface.
RIG-I-like receptors (RLRs), retinoic acid inducible gene I (RIG-I) and melanoma differentiation-associated protein 5 (MDA5), are pattern recognition receptors through which cells initially sense pathogenic RNA and trigger interferon (IFN) signaling. Herein, we report that interferon induced protein 35 (IFI35) activates the ring finger protein 125 (RNF125)-UbcH5c-dependent degradation of RLRs and represses the recognition by RIG-I and MDA5 of viral RNA to inhibit innate immunity. Furthermore, IFI35 binds selectively to different subtypes of influenza A virus (IAV) nonstructural protein 1 (NS1) with asparagine residue207 (N207). Functionally, the NS1(N207)-IFI35 interaction restores the activity of RLRs, and IAV with NS1(non-N207) showed high pathogenicity in mice. Big data analysis showed that the 21st century pandemic IAV are almost all characterized by NS1 protein with non-N207. Collectively, our data uncovered the mechanism of IFI35 restricting the activation of RLRs and provides a new drug target comprising the NS1 protein of different IAV subtypes.
L’étude du comportement des patients en regard des prescriptions et recommandations qui leur sont faites dans le domaine de la santé est un domaine d’étude qui connaît un essor important. Aujourd’hui, ces comportements se déclinent au sein d’une relation forte entre patients et médecins, ce qu’illustrent par exemple de nombreuses données sur la vaccination. Par ailleurs, l’adhérence joue un rôle majeur à la phase d’évaluation des médicaments, et malgré des investissements importants, elle reste un élément limitant qui peut conduire à rendre difficile l’évaluation de l’efficacité des traitements dans le cadre des essais randomisés. Dans le cas de la grippe, les enjeux de l’étude de ces comportements sont multiples, ils concernent à la fois la vaccination et les traitements antiviraux, à la fois les épidémies de grippe saisonnière et les pandémies dues à des virus émergents. A travers deux études sur l’acceptabilité de la vaccination pandémique et sur l’adhérence au traitement antiviral contre la grippe saisonnière, nous dressons un état des lieux des principaux enjeux liés au suivi des comportements des patients et des médecins. Le travail tente de mettre en évidence l’articulation entre grippe saisonnière et pandémique et nous avons étudié comment les politiques de préparation et de lutte contre la pandémie avaient pu avoir d’importantes conséquences au sein de la communauté scientifique et dans la population. Les résultats publiés apportent un éclairage sur les pratiques des médecins généralistes dans le cadre de la pandémie et sur l’adhérence des patients aux traitements anti-viraux dans le cadre d’un essai clinique randomisé.
Introduction: The influenza A H1N1 infection was the first pandemic in this century. To reduce the transmission, personal protection measures were emphasized and clinical observation and impatient care took place in specific areas, with respiratory droplet isolation. Objectives: To evaluate the importance of an isolation area for children admitted to a pediatic ward with suspected H1N1 infection. To characterize of the infection in hospitalized patients. Material and methods: Clinical files review. Evaluation according to parameters set by National Health Authority review using Microsoft Excel 2007. Results: The isolation area had eight beds, and 36% occupancy. Of 28 inpatients, 82% met criteria for investigation, positive in 54%. Investigation was done on 25 patients out of isolation, positive in 12%. Nosocomial infection did not occur. There were 23 cases, age ranged from six weeks to 16 years, 74% from November 16th to December 6th. Fever was always present, cough, coryza and vomiting were common. The reasons for hospitalization were fever in small infants, oral intolerance and hypoxemia. The antiviral therapy was instituted in 13 patients, with one resistance. Seven of the patients with H1N1 infection had complications: probable bacterial pneumonia (five), febrile convulsions and splenic abscesses. Conclusions: The protective measures were effective. The area was oversized. With regard to the pandemic, there is basically data from government organizations. It seems important to compare results to define strategies for a future epidemic.
The duration of viral shedding and the transmission of 2009 H1N1 influenza among individuals, especially among the younger population with mild illness, are not well understood now. The aim of this study was to determine the viral shedding of the young adult patients with mild 2009 H1N1 influenza in China.
From September 2009 to January 2010, the clinical data and serial nasopharyngeal swabs of 67 patients with 2009 H1N1 influenza and 37 patients with seasonal influenza aged from 18 years to 35 years were collected. The nasopharyngeal swab samples were detected by real time RT-PCR to determine the viral shedding. All the patients did not receive the antiviral therapy but Chinese medicine for detoxicating.
Among the patients with H1N1 virus infection, 82.1% (55/67) patients presented with fever symptom, while more patients with high fever (≥ 39°C) were found in seasonal influenza patients (P < 0.05). For the H1N1 patients, the median interval between the symptom onset and the undetectable RNA was six days (4 - 10 days). But viral shedding was still found in 31.3% patients after 7 days following illness onset. The median interval between disappearance of fever and an undetectable viral RNA level was three days (2 - 8 days), and 17.9% patients were found to be viral shedding 6 days later after normalization of body temperature. For the seasonal influenza patients, 94.6% patients were detected out viral RNA within 7 days. The median interval of seasonal influenza between the symptom onset and the undetectable RNA was four days (3 - 8 days). The median interval between disappearance of fever and an undetectable viral RNA level was three days (2 - 6 days).
It suggests that 7 days isolation period from the illness onset or 24 hours after the resolution of fever and respiratory symptoms are not long enough to cut off the transmission among Chinese young adults with mild illness.
Magnolia officinalis bark is used in traditional Chinese medicine for the treatment of cough, colds, fever, chronic bronchitis and stomach ailments.
To investigate therapeutic effects of polyphenol rich extract from M. officinalis bark (MPE) in influenza virus A-infected mice, and to provide evidence for the inflammation response and immunomodulatory potential during infection.
Mice were infected with influenza virus A (IVA) and MPE at doses of 10 and 20mg/kg were orally administrated daily for 5 days after challenge. The levels of serum L-6 and TNF-α were determined by ELISA while protein expressions of NF-κB and TLR3 were detected by western blotting analysis.
MPE exhibited significant therapeutical effects on reducing levels of serum NO, IL-6 and TNF-α, inhibiting pneumonia, decreasing lung viral titers and sensitizing IVA-induced apoptosis through down-regulation of NF-κB and TLR3 protein expression in the lung tissue of IVA-infected mice.
MPE could exhibit preventive and therapeutical effects on IVA-infected mice as a suppressor of the production of inflammatory mediators, NO and pro-inflammatory cytokines, TNF-α and IL-6. These effects appeared to be mediated, at least in part, by an inhibition of TLR3 and NF-κB activation. Therefore, MPE could provide a safe and effective therapeutic approach for influenza and its subsequent viral pneumonia.
Background:
On April 15 and April 17, 2009, novel swine-origin influenza A (H1N1) virus (S-OIV) was identified in specimens obtained from two epidemiologically unlinked patients in the United States. The same strain of the virus was identified in Mexico, Canada, and elsewhere. We describe 642 confirmed cases of human S-OIV infection identified from the rapidly evolving U.S. outbreak.
Methods:
Enhanced surveillance was implemented in the United States for human infection with influenza A viruses that could not be subtyped. Specimens were sent to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for real-time reverse-transcriptase-polymerase-chain-reaction confirmatory testing for S-OIV.
Results:
From April 15 through May 5, a total of 642 confirmed cases of S-OIV infection were identified in 41 states. The ages of patients ranged from 3 months to 81 years; 60% of patients were 18 years of age or younger. Of patients with available data, 18% had recently traveled to Mexico, and 16% were identified from school outbreaks of S-OIV infection. The most common presenting symptoms were fever (94% of patients), cough (92%), and sore throat (66%); 25% of patients had diarrhea, and 25% had vomiting. Of the 399 patients for whom hospitalization status was known, 36 (9%) required hospitalization. Of 22 hospitalized patients with available data, 12 had characteristics that conferred an increased risk of severe seasonal influenza, 11 had pneumonia, 8 required admission to an intensive care unit, 4 had respiratory failure, and 2 died. The S-OIV was determined to have a unique genome composition that had not been identified previously.
Conclusions:
A novel swine-origin influenza A virus was identified as the cause of outbreaks of febrile respiratory infection ranging from self-limited to severe illness. It is likely that the number of confirmed cases underestimates the number of cases that have occurred.
In April 2009, an outbreak due to infection with the 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) virus (pH1N1) was investigated in a
New York City high school. We surveyed household contacts of ill students to characterize the extent of transmission within
households, identify contact groups at highest risk for illness, and assess the potential for preventing household transmission.
Influenza-like illness (ILI) was reported by 79 of 702 household contacts (11.3% attack rate). Multivariate analysis showed
that older age was protective: for each increasing year of age, the risk of ILI was reduced 5%. Additional protective factors
included antiviral prophylaxis and having had a household discussion about influenza. Providing care for the index case patient
and watching television with the index case patient were risk factors among parents and siblings, respectively. Fifty percent
of cases occurred within 3 days of onset of illness in the student. These factors have implications for mitigating the impact
of pH1N1 transmission.
Influenza viruses circulate around the world every year. From time to time new strains emerge and cause global pandemics. Many national and international health agencies recommended the use of face masks during the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) pandemic. We reviewed the English-language literature on this subject to inform public health preparedness. There is some evidence to support the wearing of masks or respirators during illness to protect others, and public health emphasis on mask wearing during illness may help to reduce influenza virus transmission. There are fewer data to support the use of masks or respirators to prevent becoming infected. Further studies in controlled settings and studies of natural infections in healthcare and community settings are required to better define the effectiveness of face masks and respirators in preventing influenza virus transmission.
(H1N1) 2009, we built a probabilistic multiplier model that adjusts the count of laboratory-confirmed cases for each of the following steps: medical care seeking (A), specimen collection (B), submission of specimens for confirmation (C), laboratory detection of pandemic (H1N1) 2009 (D), and reporting of confirmed cases (E) (Figure). This approach has been used to calculate the underrecognized impact of foodborne illness in the United States (3). At each step, we identified a range of proportions observed in prior published studies and recent surveys and investigations of pandemic (H1N1) 2009. These include 2 unpublished community surveys on influenza-like illness (ILI) and health-seeking behavior, the 2007 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey conducted in 10 Through July 2009, a total of 43,677 laboratory-confi
To evaluate the performance of a rapid influenza diagnostic test (RIDT) in detecting H1N1 2009 influenza A virus in respiratory samples from pediatric patients in comparison to that of real-time reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) and viral culture. Methodology. This was a cross-sectional diagnostic-accuracy study conducted at a tertiary care children's hospital. Patients for whom the RIDT (BinaxNOW [Binax, Inc, Portland, ME]), viral culture, and rRT-PCR results were known were included. Sensitivity, specificity, and likelihood ratios (LRs) were calculated.
A total of 3030 specimens had RIDT results paired with both rRT-PCR and viral culture results. With rRT-PCR as the reference, overall test sensitivity was 45% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 43.3%-46.3%) and specificity was 98.6% (95% CI: 98.1%-99%). Positive and negative LRs were 32.9 (95% CI: 22.9-45.4) and 0.56 (95% CI: 0.54-0.58), respectively. RIDT sensitivity was significantly higher in young infants and children younger than 2 years than in older children. Using viral culture as the reference standard, RIDT sensitivity was 55.5% (95% CI: 51.9%-95.6%) and specificity was 95.6% (95% CI: 95%-96.1%). The positive and negative LRs were 12.6 and 0.47, respectively.
The RIDT had relatively poor sensitivity but excellent specificity in this consecutive series of respiratory specimens obtained from pediatric patients. Although a positive RIDT result was highly accurate in predicting infection with influenza type A H1N1 2009 in children, a negative RIDT result did not preclude a child having H1N1. Therefore, for children at high risk with influenza-like illnesses during high-prevalence periods of influenza, empiric initiation of antiviral therapy should be considered for patients with a negative RIDT result.
This report updates the 2008 recommendations by CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding the use of influenza vaccine for the prevention and control of seasonal influenza (CDC. Prevention and control of influenza: recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices [ACIP]. MMWR 2008;57[No. RR-7]). Information on vaccination issues related to the recently identified novel influenza A H1N1 virus will be published later in 2009. The 2009 seasonal influenza recommendations include new and updated information. Highlights of the 2009 recommendations include 1) a recommendation that annual vaccination be administered to all children aged 6 months-18 years for the 2009-10 influenza season; 2) a recommendation that vaccines containing the 2009-10 trivalent vaccine virus strains A/Brisbane/59/2007 (H1N1)-like, A/Brisbane/10/2007 (H3N2)-like, and B/Brisbane/60/2008-like antigens be used; and 3) a notice that recommendations for influenza diagnosis and antiviral use will be published before the start of the 2009-10 influenza season. Vaccination efforts should begin as soon as vaccine is available and continue through the influenza season. Approximately 83% of the United States population is specifically recommended for annual vaccination against seasonal influenza; however, <40% of the U.S. population received the 2008-09 influenza vaccine. These recommendations also include a summary of safety data for U.S. licensed influenza vaccines. These recommendations and other information are available at CDC's influenza website (http://www.cdc.gov/flu); any updates or supplements that might be required during the 2009-10 influenza season also can be found at this website. Vaccination and health-care providers should be alert to announcements of recommendation updates and should check the CDC influenza website periodically for additional information.
Pandemic H1N1 2009 influenza virus has been identified as the cause of a widespread outbreak of febrile respiratory infection in the USA and worldwide. We summarised cases of infection with pandemic H1N1 virus in pregnant women identified in the USA during the first month of the present outbreak, and deaths associated with this virus during the first 2 months of the outbreak.
After initial reports of infection in pregnant women, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) began systematically collecting additional information about cases and deaths in pregnant women in the USA with pandemic H1N1 virus infection as part of enhanced surveillance. A confirmed case was defined as an acute respiratory illness with laboratory-confirmed pandemic H1N1 virus infection by real-time reverse-transcriptase PCR or viral culture; a probable case was defined as a person with an acute febrile respiratory illness who was positive for influenza A, but negative for H1 and H3. We used population estimates derived from the 2007 census data to calculate rates of admission to hospital and illness.
From April 15 to May 18, 2009, 34 confirmed or probable cases of pandemic H1N1 in pregnant women were reported to CDC from 13 states. 11 (32%) women were admitted to hospital. The estimated rate of admission for pandemic H1N1 influenza virus infection in pregnant women during the first month of the outbreak was higher than it was in the general population (0.32 per 100 000 pregnant women, 95% CI 0.13-0.52 vs 0.076 per 100 000 population at risk, 95% CI 0.07-0.09). Between April 15 and June 16, 2009, six deaths in pregnant women were reported to the CDC; all were in women who had developed pneumonia and subsequent acute respiratory distress syndrome requiring mechanical ventilation.
Pregnant women might be at increased risk for complications from pandemic H1N1 virus infection. These data lend support to the present recommendation to promptly treat pregnant women with H1N1 influenza virus infection with anti-influenza drugs.
US CDC.
What's new in childhood and adolescent immunization. Presented at the 31st Annual Conference of the National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners
- W Atkinson
Atkinson, W. (2010, April). What's new in childhood and adolescent immunization. Presented at the 31st Annual Conference of the National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners, Chicago, IL.
Infectious diseases and immunizations.
- Blosser C.G.
- Brady M.A.
- Muller W.K.
Blosser, C. G., Brady, M. A., & Muller, W. K. (2009). Infectious diseases and immunizations. In C. A. Burns, A. M. Dunn,
M. A. Brady, N. B. Starr & C. G. Blosser (Eds.), Pediatric primary
care (4th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Saunders.
Update: Novel influenza A (H1N1) virus infections-worldwide
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2009a). Update: Novel
influenza A (H1N1) virus infections-worldwide, May 6, 2009.
MMWR Weekly, 58(17), 453-458.
Recommendations for use of antiviral medications for the management of influenza in children and adolescents for the 2009-2010 season-pediatric supplement for health care providers
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2009b). 2009-2010
Influenza season week 42 ending October 24, 2009. Retrieved
from http://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/weeklyarchives2009-2010
/weekly42.htm
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2009c). Recommendations for use of antiviral medications for the management of
influenza in children and adolescents for the 2009-2010
season-pediatric supplement for health care providers (updated
December 24, 2009). Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/
h1n1flu/recommendations_pediatric_supplement.htm#box1
Surveillance for pediatric deaths associated with 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) virus infection-United States
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2009d). Surveillance for
pediatric deaths associated with 2009 pandemic influenza A
(H1N1) virus infection-United States, April-August 2009.
MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 58(36), 1009-1012, Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/
mmwrhtml/mm5834a1.htm.
CDC guidance for state and local public health officials and school administrators for school (K-12) responses to
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2009e). Interim recommendations for clinical use of influenza diagnostic tests during
the 2009-10 influenza season (updated September 29, 2009).
Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/guidance/diagno
stic_tests.htm
Centers for Disease Control andPrevention. (2009f). Emergency use
authorization of peramivir IV. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.
gov/h1n1flu/eua/peramivir.htm
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2009g). Respiratory
hygiene/cough etiquette in healthcare settings. Retrieved from
http://www.cdc.gov/flu/professionals/infectioncontrol/resphygie
ne.htm
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2009h). CDC recommendations for the amount of time persons with influenza-like
illness should be away from others (updated October 23,
2009). Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/guidance/
exclusion.htm
Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention. (2009i). CDC guidance
for state and local public health officials and school administrators for school (K-12) responses to influenza during the 2009-2010 school year. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/
h1n1flu/schools/schoolguidance.htm
Notifiable diseases and mortality tables
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2009j). 2009 H1N1 vaccination recommendations. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.
gov/h1n1flu/vaccination/acip.htm
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2010a). Notifiable
diseases and mortality tables. MMWR Weekly, 59(11), 341-354.
CDC estimates of 2009 H1N1 influenza cases, hospitalizations and deaths in the United States
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2010b). CDC estimates
of 2009 H1N1 influenza cases, hospitalizations and deaths in the
United States, April-December 12, 2009. Retrieved from http://
www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/estimates/April_December_12.htm
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2010c). 2009-2010 Influenza season week 11 ending March 20, 2010. Retrieved from
http://www.cdc.gov/flu/weekly/index.htm
2009 H1N1 flu: International situation update
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2010d). 2009 H1N1 flu:
International situation update (last updated March 26, 2010). Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/h1n1flu/updates/international/
?s_cid=cs_000
Interim guidance on infection control measures for 2009 influenza in healthcare settings, including protection of healthcare personnel
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2010e). Interim guidance on infection control measures for 2009 influenza in healthcare settings, including protection of healthcare personnel
(updated March 10, 2010). Retrieved from http://www.cdc.
gov/h1n1flu/guidelines_infection_control.htm
Centers for DiseaseControl and Prevention. (2010f). CDC 2009 H1N1
flu media briefing: Thursday, April 1, 2010. Retrieved from http://
www.cdc.gov/media/transcripts/2010/t100401.htm
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2010g). CDC's
Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) recommends universal annual influenza vaccination. Retrieved from
http://www.cdc.gov/media/pressrel/2010/r100224.htm
2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) in pregnant women requiring intensive care
- A Fine
Fine, A. (2010). 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) in pregnant
women requiring intensive care-New York City, 2009.
MMWR Weekly, 59(11), 321-326.
H1N1 flu vaccine-Why the delay?
- T Frieden
Frieden, T. (2009). H1N1 flu vaccine-Why the delay? (pod cast by
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on November
5, 2009). Retrieved from http://www2c.cdc.gov/podcasts/
player.asp?f=262894
Use of influenza A (H1N1) monovalent vaccine. Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP), 2009
- National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases
National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases. (2009). Use
of influenza A (H1N1) monovalent vaccine. Recommendations of
the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP),
2009. MMWR Recommendations and Reports, 58(RR10), 1-8.
Estimates of the prevanence of pandemic (H1N1)
- C Reed
- F J Angulo
- D L Swerdlow
- M Lipsitch
- M I Meltzer
- D Jernigan
- L Finelli
Reed, C., Angulo, F. J., Swerdlow, D. L., Lipsitch, M., Meltzer, M. I.,
Jernigan, D., & Finelli, L. (2009). Estimates of the prevanence of
pandemic (H1N1) 2009, United States, April-July 2009. Emerging Infectious Diseases, 15(12), 2004-2007.
WHO vaccine recommendations for 2010-2011 northern hemisphere influenza season
World Health Organization. (2010a). WHO Global Influenza Surveillance Network. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/csr/
disease/influenza/surveillance/en/index.html
World Health Organization. (2010b). WHO vaccine recommendations for 2010-2011 northern hemisphere influenza season. Retrieved from http://www.euro.who.int/influenza/seasonal/20
100224_1
Surveillance for pediatric deaths associated with 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) virus infection—United States, April-August 2009
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Infectious diseases and immunizations
- Blosser
Presented at the 31st Annual Conference of the National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners
- W Atkinson