• 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.

Immun Inflamm Dis . Temporal and Demographic Variations in Hospital-Based Influenza A Virus Positivity Rates Before, During, and After the COVID-19 Pa

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Immun Inflamm Dis

. 2026 Nov;14(11):e70605.
doi: 10.1002/iid3.70605.

Temporal and Demographic Variations in Hospital-Based Influenza A Virus Positivity Rates Before, During, and After the COVID-19 Pandemic: A 6-Year Single-Center Study in Southwest China​


Hao Dang 1 , Xiujuan Peng 1 , Li Xu 1 , Wei Wang 2 , Ping Tang 2

Affiliations Expand


Abstract​


Objective: To characterize the epidemiological dynamics of hospital-based influenza A virus (IAV) test positivity rates (TPR) across the pre-, during-, and post-COVID-19 pandemic periods in Southwest China, while addressing biases introduced by evolving testing methodologies and healthcare-seeking behaviors.


Methods: A total of 57,704 influenza A test records from a symptom-driven, care-seeking population at the Third Hospital of Mianyang were retrospectively analyzed from 2018 to 2024. Detection methods included colloidal gold immunoassay (Stages 1-2) and quantitative PCR (Stage 3). Because assay type was completely confounded with pandemic stage, test-performance comparisons across modalities were not feasible; all findings are interpreted as hospital-based TPR rather than community prevalence.


Results: The overall IAV TPR was 14.8%. TPR dropped sharply to 4.5% during the implementation of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) and surged to 17.8% in the post-pandemic period, peaking in 2023. Age-specific positivity patterns shifted markedly across stages, consistent with a composite of changing viral circulation, testing thresholds, and clinical triage practices.


Conclusion: IAV test positivity rebounded significantly following the relaxation of containment measures. Interpretations of TPR must account for detection-method biases, variations in testing volume, and clinical triage practices, as TPR is a proxy for healthcare system stress rather than a direct measure of community prevalence. Stage-specific, methodologically transparent surveillance is warranted to inform future pandemic preparedness.

Keywords: COVID‐19; China; Influenza A Virus; hospital‐based test positivity rates; pandemic; surveillance; testing methods.
 
Back
Top Bottom