• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Dynamic epidemic model for influenza with clinical complications

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2011 May;32(5):456-64.
Dynamic epidemic model for influenza with clinical complications.
Wang ST, Chen LS, Lee LT, Chen HH.
Source

Department of Family Medicine, School of Medicine, College of Medicine, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Abstract

Objective.  To incorporate clinical complications in the susceptible-infectious-recovered model to estimate parameters needed in dynamic changes of infectious diseases and to further evaluate the impact of disease-controlling methods. Methods. We developed a new extended epidemic model that incorporates of disease-related complications. This model was applied to empirical data on influenza during the epidemic season of 2001-2002 in Taipei County, Taiwan, to estimate the transmission parameters that were converted to the basic reproductive rate (R(0)). The proposed model, in conjunction with estimated parameters, was applied in quantifying the efficacy of different preventive strategies. Results. During the study period there were 5 outbreaks of influenza. The estimated transmission probability for outbreak 1 was 0.135, with corresponding estimate of R(0), 2.7; for outbreak 2, 0.165, with estimated R(0), 3.3; for outbreak 3, 0.15, with R(0), 4.5; for outbreak 4, 0.165, with R(0), 5; and for outbreak 5, 0.165, with R(0), 5. The efficacy of antiviral prophylaxis to reduce the total episodes was 18% (95% CI, 15%-21%) under the coverage rate of 30%, 31% (95% CI, 26%-36%) under the coverage rate of 50%, and 73% (95% CI, 59%-90%) under the coverage rate of 80%. The corresponding figures for the efficacy of vaccination were 17% (95% CI, 15%-20%), 41% (95% CI, 35%-48%), and 76% (95% CI, 61%-95%). Combination of both methods would yield efficacy of 32% (95% CI, 28%-38%), 59% (95% CI, 49%-71%), and 88% (95% CI, 66%-118%), respectively. Conclusions. We demonstrate how to apply a novel extended model to empirical surveillance data of an influenza study for estimating parameters pertaining to dynamic changes in the infection process. These parameters were further used to evaluate the impact of antiviral prophylaxis alone, vaccination alone, or the use of both methods.

PMID:
21515976
[PubMed - in process]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21515976
 
Back
Top Bottom