Eurosurveillance - Volume 15, Issue 49, 09 December 2010

European Union (EU) and European Economic Area (EEA) countries reported surveillance data on 2009 pandemic influenza A(H1N1) cases to the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) through the Early Warning and Response System (EWRS) during the early phase of the 2009 pandemic. We describe the main epidemiological findings and their implications in respect to the second wave of the 2009 influenza pandemic. Two reporting systems were in place (aggregate and case-based) from June to September 2009 to monitor the evolution of the pandemic. The notification rate was assessed through aggregate reports. Individual data were analysed retrospectively to describe the population affected. The reporting peak of the first wave of the 2009 pandemic influenza was reached in the first week of August. Transmission was travel-related in the early stage and community transmission within EU/EEA countries was reported from June 2009. Seventy eight per cent of affected individuals were less than 30 years old. The proportions of cases with complications and underlying conditions were 3% and 7%, respectively. The most frequent underlying medical conditions were chronic lung (37%) and cardio-vascular diseases (15%). Complication and hospitalisation were both associated with underlying conditions regardless of age. The information from the first wave of the pandemic produced a basis to determine risk groups and vaccination strategies before the start of the winter wave. Public health recommendations should be guided by early capture of profiles of affected populations through monitoring of infectious diseases.

In a pandemic setting, surveillance is essential to monitor the spread of the disease and assess its impact. Appropriate mitigation and healthcare preparedness strategies depend on fast and accurate epidemic surveillance data. During the 2009 influenza A(H1N1) pandemic, rapid improvements in influenza surveillance were made in Iceland. Here, we describe the improvements made in influenza surveillance during the pandemic , which could also be of great value in outbreaks caused by other pathogens. Following the raised level of pandemic influenza alert in April 2009, influenza surveillance was intensified. A comprehensive automatic surveillance system for influenza-like illness was developed, surveillance of influenza-related deaths was established and laboratory surveillance for influenza was strengthened. School absenteeism reports were also collected and compared with results from the automatic surveillance system. The first case of 2009 pandemic influenza A(H1N1) was diagnosed in Iceland in May 2009, but sustained community transmission was not confirmed until mid-August. The pandemic virus circulated during the summer and early autumn before an abrupt increase in the number of cases was observed in October. There were large outbreaks in elementary schools for children aged 6-15 years throughout the country that peaked in late October. School absenteeism reports from all elementary schools in Iceland gave a similar epidemiological curve as that from data from the healthcare system. Estimates of the proportion of the population infected with the pandemic virus ranged from 10% to 22%. This study shows how the sudden need for improved surveillance in the pandemic led to rapid improvements in data collection in Iceland. This reporting system will be improved upon and expanded to include other notifiable diseases, to ensure accurate and timely collection of epidemiological data. .

Surveillance of 2009 pandemic influenza A(H1N1) in Denmark was enhanced during the 2009-10 winter season with a system monitoring the burden of the pandemic on intensive care units (ICUs), in order to inform policymakers and detect shortages in ICUs in a timely manner. Between week 46 of 2009 and week 11 of 2010, all 36 relevant Danish ICUs reported in two ways: aggregate data were reported online and case-based data on paper. Cases to be reported were defined as patients admitted to an ICU with laboratory-confirmed 2009 pandemic influenza A(H1N1) infection or clinically suspected illness after close contact with a laboratory-confirmed case. Aggregate numbers of cases were reported weekly: during weeks 48-51 (the peak), reporting was daily. The case-based reports contained demographic and clinical information. The aggregate surveillance registered 93 new cases, the case-based surveillance 61, of whom 53 were laboratory confirmed. The proportion of beds used for influenza patients did not exceed 4.5% of the national capacity. Hospitals with cases used a median of 11% of bed capacity (range: 3-40%). Of the patients for whom information was available, 15 of 48 patients developed renal insufficiency, 19 of 50 developed septic shock and 17 of 53 died. The number of patients with pandemic influenza could be managed within the national bed capacity, although the impact on some ICUs was substantial. The combination of both reporting methods (collecting aggregate and case-based data) proved to be useful for monitoring the burden of the pandemic on ICUs. .

The mortality in Germany caused by the 2009 pandemic influenza A(H1N1) seems to have been one of the lowest in Europe. We provide a detailed analysis of all 252 fatal cases of confirmed infection with the pandemic virus notified between 29 April 2009 and 31 March 2010. The overall mortality was 3.1 (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.7 to 3.5) per one million inhabitants. We observed an increase in the case fatality rate of notified cases over time; notified cases aged 60 years or older had the highest case fatality rate (2.16%; 95% CI: 1.61 to 2.83; odds ratio: 5.4; p<0.001; reference group: 35-59 years). The median delay of four days (interquartile range (IQR): 2-7) between symptom onset and antiviral treatment was significantly longer in fatal cases than for non-fatal cases (median: two days (IQR: 1-3; p<0.001). Analysis of the underlying medical conditions of fatal cases, based on the observed frequency of the conditions in the general population, confirms the risk for fatal outcome, which is most notably due to immunosuppression, diabetes and respiratory diseases. Our results suggest that early treatment might have had an impact on overall mortality. Identification of risk groups for targeted intervention to prevent fatalities needs to take into account the distribution of underlying conditions in the population. .

In Italy, the arrival of the 2009 pandemic influenza A(H1N1) virus triggered an integrated response that was mainly based on the 2006 National Pandemic Preparedness and Response Plan. In this article we analyse the main activities implemented for epidemiological surveillance, containment and mitigation of the pandemic influenza and the lesson learned from this experience. Overall, from week 31 (27 July - 2 August) of 2009 to week 17 (26 April - 2 May) of 2010, we estimate that there were approximately 5,600,000 cases of influenza-like illness (ILI) who received medical attention (with almost 2,000 laboratory-confirmed cases of pandemic influenza from May to October 2009). A total of 1,106 confirmed cases were admitted to hospital for serious conditions, of whom 532 were admitted to intensive care units. There were 260 reported deaths due to pandemic influenza. Approximately 870,000 first doses of the pandemic vaccine were administered, representing a vaccine coverage of 4% of the target population. One of the possible reasons for the low uptake of the pandemic vaccine in the target population could be the communication strategy adopted, for both the general population and healthcare workers, which turned out to be a major challenge. Active involvement of all health professionals (at local, regional and national level) in influenza pandemic preparedness and response should be encouraged in the future. .