• 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.

Euro Surveill. Two waves of pandemic influenza A(H1N1)2009 in Wales ? the possible impact of media coverage on consultation rates, April ? December 20

Giuseppe

Emeritus
Two waves of pandemic influenza A(H1N1)2009 in Wales ? the possible impact of media coverage on consultation rates, April ? December 2009 (Euro Surveill., abstract, edited)


[Source: Eurosurveillance, full text: <cite cite="http://www.eurosurveillance.org/ViewArticle.aspx?ArticleId=19772">Eurosurveillance - View Article</cite>. Abstract, edited.]

Eurosurveillance, Volume 16, Issue 3, 20 January 2011

Surveillance and outbreak reports

Two waves of pandemic influenza A(H1N1)2009 in Wales ? the possible impact of media coverage on consultation rates, April ? December 2009

M Keramarou 1,2, S Cottrell 1, M R Evans 1,3, J Moore 4, R E Stiff 1, C Elliott 1, D R Thomas 1, M Lyons 5, R L Salmon 1

1. Communicable Disease Surveillance Centre, Public Health Wales, Cardiff, United Kingdom
2. European Programme on Intervention Epidemiology Training (EPIET)
3. Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Cardiff University, United Kingdom
4. Public Health Wales Microbiology, Cardiff, United Kingdom
5. Health Protection Services, Public Health Wales, Cardiff, United Kingdom

Citation style for this article: Keramarou M, Cottrell S, Evans MR, Moore J, Stiff RE, Elliott C, Thomas DR, Lyons M, Salmon RL. Two waves of pandemic influenza A(H1N1)2009 in Wales ? the possible impact of media coverage on consultation rates, April ? December 2009. Euro Surveill. 2011;16(3):pii=19772. Available online: http://www.eurosurveillance.org/ViewArticle.aspx?ArticleId=19772

Date of submission: 19 May 2010


In the United Kingdom, the influenza A(H1N1)2009 pandemic had a distinct two-wave pattern of general practice consultations for influenza-like illness (ILI). We describe the epidemiology of the influenza pandemic in Wales between April and December 2009 using integrated data from a number of independent sources: GP surveillance, community virology surveillance, hospital admissions and deaths, and media enquiries monitoring. The first wave peaked in late July at 100 consultations per 100,000 general practice population and attracted intensive media coverage. The positivity rate for the A(H1N1)2009 influenza did not exceed 25% and only 44 hospitalisations and one death were recorded. By contrast, the second wave peaked in late October and although characterised by lower ILI consultation rates (65 consultations per 100,000 general practice population) and low profile media activity, was associated with much higher positivity rates for pandemic influenza A(H1N1)2009 (60%) and substantially more hospital admissions (n=379) and deaths (n=26). The large number of ILI-related consultations during the first wave in Wales probably reflected the intensive media activity rather than influenza virus circulating in the community. Data from community surveillance schemes may therefore have considerably overestimated the true incidence of influenza. This has implications for the future interpretation of ILI surveillance data and their use in policy making, and underlines the importance of using integrated epidemiological, virological and hospital surveillance data to monitor influenza activity.

-
-----
 
Back
Top Bottom