Refine
Year of publication
Has Fulltext
- yes (15)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (15)
Keywords
- SARS-CoV-2 (3)
- COVID-19 (2)
- mandatory reporting (2)
- Air traffic (1)
- Arbeitsbedingt erworbene Infektion (1)
- B.1.1.7 (1)
- B.1.617.1 (1)
- B.1.617.2 (1)
- BNT2b2 (1)
- Berufskrankheit (1)
Institute
- Medizin (15)
Influenza A (H1N1) 2009 : impact on Frankfurt in due consideration of health care and public health
(2010)
Background: In April 2009 a novel influenza A H1N1/2009 virus was identified in Mexico and in the United States which quickly spread around the world. Most of the countries established infection surveillance systems in order to track the number of (laboratory-confirmed) H1N1 cases, hospitalizations and deaths. Methods: The impact of the emergence of the novel pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus on Frankfurt was statistically evaluated by the Health Protection Authority, City of Frankfurt am Main. Vaccination rates of the health care workers (HCWs) of the University Hospital Frankfurt were measured by the Occupational Health Service. Results: Although the virulence of pandemic (H1N1) 2009 seems to be comparable with seasonal influenza, a major patient load and wave of hospital admissions occurred in the summer of 2009. Even though the 2009 vaccination rate of the University Hospital Frankfurt (seasonal influenza [40.5%], swine flu [36.3%]) is better than the average annual uptake of influenza vaccine in the German health care system (approximately 22% for seasonal and 15% for swine flu), vaccination levels remain insufficient. However, physicians were significantly (p < 0.001) more likely to have been vaccinated against swine flu and seasonal influenza than nurses. Conclusions: The outbreak of the pandemic (H1N1) 2009 in April 2009 provided a major challenge to health services around the world. Nosocomial transmission of H1N1/2009 has been documented. Present experience should be used to improve pandemic preparedness plans and vaccination programs ought to target as many HCWs as possible.
Background Medical students come into contact with infectious diseases early on their career. Immunity against vaccine-preventable diseases is therefore vital for both medical students and the patients with whom they come into contact. Methods The purpose of this study was to compare the medical history and serological status of selected vaccine-preventable diseases of medical students in Germany. Results The overall correlation between medical history statements and serological findings among the 150 students studied was 86.7 %, 66.7 %, 78 % and 93.3 % for measles, mumps, rubella and varicella, conditional on sufficient immunity being achieved after one vaccination. Conclusions Although 81.2 % of the students medical history data correlated with serological findings, significant gaps in immunity were found. Our findings indicate that medical history alone is not a reliable screening tool for immunity against the vaccine-preventable diseases studied.
Background: Highly infectious diseases (HIDs) are defined as being transmissible from person to person, causing life-threatening illnesses and presenting a serious public health hazard. The sampling, handling and transport of specimens from patients with HIDs present specific bio-safety concerns. Findings The European Network for HID project aimed to record, in a cross-sectional study, the infection control capabilities of referral centers for HIDs across Europe and assesses the level of achievement to previously published guidelines. In this paper, we report the current diagnostic capabilities and bio-safety measures applied to diagnostic procedures in these referral centers. Overall, 48 isolation facilities in 16 European countries were evaluated. Although 81% of these referral centers are located near a biosafety level 3 laboratory, 11% and 31% of them still performed their microbiological and routine diagnostic analyses, respectively, without bio-safety measures.
Conclusions: The discrepancies among the referral centers surveyed between the level of practices and the European Network of Infectious Diseases (EUNID) recommendations have multiple reasons of which the interest of the individuals in charge and the investment they put in preparedness to emerging outbreaks. Despite the fact that the less prepared centers can improve by just updating their practice and policies any support to help them to achieve an acceptable level of biosecurity is welcome.
Background: In Emergency and Medical Admission Departments (EDs and MADs), prompt recognition and appropriate infection control management of patients with Highly Infectious Diseases (HIDs, e.g. Viral Hemorrhagic Fevers and SARS) are fundamental for avoiding nosocomial outbreaks.
Methods: The EuroNHID (European Network for Highly Infectious Diseases) project collected data from 41 EDs and MADs in 14 European countries, located in the same facility as a national/regional referral centre for HIDs, using specifically developed checklists, during on-site visits from February to November 2009.
Results: Isolation rooms were available in 34 facilities (82,9%): these rooms had anteroom in 19, dedicated entrance in 15, negative pressure in 17, and HEPA filtration of exhausting air in 12. Only 6 centres (14,6%) had isolation rooms with all characteristics. Personnel trained for the recognition of HIDs was available in 24 facilities; management protocols for HIDs were available in 35.
Conclusions: Preparedness level for the safe and appropriate management of HIDs is partially adequate in the surveyed EDs and MADs.
Background: Highly infectious diseases (HIDs) are (i) easily transmissible from person to person; (ii) cause a life-threatening illness with no or few treatment options; and (iii) pose a threat for both personnel and the public. Hence, even suspected HID cases should be managed in specialised facilities minimizing infection risks but allowing state-of-the-art critical care. Consensus statements on the operational management of isolation facilities have been published recently. The study presented was set up to compare the operational management, resources, and technical equipment among European isolation facilities. Due to differences in geography, population density, and national response plans it was hypothesized that adherence to recommendations will vary.
Methods and Findings: Until mid of 2010 the European Network for Highly Infectious Diseases conducted a cross-sectional analysis of isolation facilities in Europe, recruiting 48 isolation facilities in 16 countries. Three checklists were disseminated, assessing 44 items and 148 specific questions. The median feedback rate for specific questions was 97.9% (n = 47/48) (range: n = 7/48 (14.6%) to n = 48/48 (100%). Although all facilities enrolled were nominated specialised facilities' serving countries or regions, their design, equipment and personnel management varied. Eighteen facilities fulfilled the definition of a High Level Isolation Unit'. In contrast, 24 facilities could not operate independently from their co-located hospital, and five could not ensure access to equipment essential for infection control. Data presented are not representative for the EU in general, as only 16/27 (59.3%) of all Member States agreed to participate. Another limitation of this study is the time elapsed between data collection and publication; e.g. in Germany one additional facility opened in the meantime.
Conclusion: There are disparities both within and between European countries regarding the design and equipment of isolation facilities. With regard to the International Health Regulations, terminology, capacities and equipment should be standardised.
Hintergrund: Eine standardisierte Erhebung von COVID-19-Infektionen bei Gesundheitspersonal während der laufenden Pandemie war und ist nicht gegeben. Vor allem der Anteil von arbeitsbedingten Infektionen beim Gesundheitspersonal und die Frage, welche Arbeitnehmer/-innen darunter am meisten gefährdet sind, bleiben unklar.
Ziel: Ziel dieser Studie war es, die gemeldeten COVID-19-Fälle beim Gesundheitspersonal in Frankfurt/Main in den ersten 6 Monaten der Pandemie zu analysieren, die Zahl der arbeitsbedingten Infektionen zu ermitteln und somit eine bessere Interpretation der durch das Robert Koch-Institut veröffentlichten Daten zu ermöglichen.
Methoden: Die Daten des Gesundheitsamts Frankfurt/Main wurden für den Zeitraum vom 01.03. bis zum 31.08.2020 betrachtet und medizinisches Personal für eine Querschnittserhebung im Rahmen einer Umfrage rekrutiert. Drei Subgruppen wurden nach Ort des Infektionskontakts, am Arbeitsplatz, im Privaten und unbekannt, unterteilt und analysiert.
Ergebnisse: Medizinisches Personal machte 11,8 % (319/2700) aller gemeldeten COVID-19-Fälle in Frankfurt/Main im untersuchten Zeitraum aus. In der Umfrage gaben 47,2 % der Befragten an, dass ihre Infektion am Arbeitsplatz erworben wurde. Es zeigte sich eine Assoziation von Kontakt zu COVID-19-Patient/-innen sowie der Beschäftigung auf einer internistischen Station und einer arbeitsbedingten Infektion. Ersichtlich wurde außerdem ein Zusammenhang zwischen mutmaßlichen Infektionen am Arbeitsplatz und folglich gestellten Verdachtsanzeigen auf Berufskrankheit.
Diskussion und Fazit: Gesundheitsämter sind in der Lage, relevante Daten von arbeitsbedingten Transmissionen in Berufen und Arbeitsplätzen im Gesundheitswesen zu erheben, und sollten standardisierte Daten zu infiziertem Gesundheitspersonal generieren. Diese Daten sind notwendig, um gezielte Maßnahmen der Infektionsprävention zu ergreifen, die Gesundheitspersonal und ihre Patient/-innen schützen.
Background: The federal state of Hesse, Germany, introduced a laboratory-based reporting scheme for carbapenem-resistant organisms (CROs).
Method: The results of the first year of mandated reporting of CROs from April 2012 through March 2013 to the Public Health Authority of Frankfurt/Main, responsible for a population of 700,000 inhabitants, are described.
Results: Within a period of 12 months 243 CROs were notified to the health authority. Of these 213 isolates had been reported from 16 of the 17 hospitals in Frankfurt/Main, 6 from ambulatory settings and 24 from clinics outside of Frankfurt/Main. Mean incidence rate per 1,000 patient days in hospitals was 0.138 (range 0.02-0.28).
Conclusion: In Frankfurt/Main almost all hospitals have reported CROs in the study period though the frequency of isolation varies strongly and many facilities only report CROs sporadically. Molecular data indicate a high diversity of different carbapenemases. Autochthonous transmission must be assumed despite the absence of major outbreaks. Rapid and coordinated efforts by clinicians and health departments are crucial to control the spread of CRO infections. The mandatory reporting scheme provides important data to guide the implementation of preventive measures.
Introduction: From the beginning of the corona pandemic until August 19, 2020, more than 21,989,366 cases have been reported worldwide – 228,495 in Germany alone, including 12,648 children aged 0–14. In many countries, the proportion of infected children in the total population is comparatively low; in addition, children often have no or milder symptoms and are less likely to transmit the pathogen to adults than the other way round. Based on the registration data in Frankfurt am Main, Germany, the symptoms of children in comparison with adults and the likely routes of transmission are presented below.
Materials and methods: The documentation of the mandatory reports includes personal data (name, date of birth, gender, place of residence), disease characteristics (date of report, date of onset of the disease, symptoms), possible contact persons (family, others) and i.a. possible activity or care in children’s community facilities. All reports were viewed, especially with regard to likely transmission routes.
Results: From March 1 to July 31, 2020, 1,977 infected people were reported, including 138 children between the ages of 0 and 14 years. Children had fewer and milder symptoms than adults. None of the children experienced severe respiratory symptoms or the need for ventilation. 62% of the children had no symptoms at all (19% adults), 5% of the children were hospitalized (24% adults), and none of the children died (3.8% adults).
After excluding a cluster of 34 children from refugee accommodations and 14 children from a parish, 78% of the remaining 90 children had been infected by an adult within the family, and only 4% were likely to have a reverse transmission route. In 5.5% of cases, transmission in a community facility was likely.
Discussion: The results of the registration data from Frankfurt am Main, Germany confirm the results published in other countries: Children are less likely to become infected, and if infected, their symptoms are less severe than in adults, and they are apparently not the main drivers of virus transmission. Therefore, scientific medical associations strongly recommend reopening schools.
For infectious diseases caused by highly pathogenic agents (e. g., Ebola/Lassa fever virus, SARS-/MERS-CoV, pandemic influenza virus) which have the potential to spread over several continents within only a few days, international Health Protection Authorities have taken appropriate measures to limit the consequences of a possible spread. A crucial point in this context is the disinfection of an aircraft that had a passenger on board who is suspected of being infected with one of the mentioned diseases. Although, basic advice on hygiene and sanitation on board an aircraft is given by the World Health Organization, these guidelines lack details on available and effective substances as well as standardized operating procedures (SOP). The purpose of this paper is to give guidance on the choice of substances that were tested by a laboratory of Lufthansa Technik and found compatible with aircraft components, as well as to describe procedures which ensure a safe and efficient disinfection of civil aircrafts. This guidance and the additional SOPs are made public and are available as mentioned in this paper.
Responses to recent infectious disease outbreaks, such as to Influenza Pandemic 2009 and the on-going Ebola outbreak in West Africa, reveal the need for new and strengthened approaches to risk communication and governance. The article argues for a fundamental re-conceptualisation of current approaches to risk communication, preparedness planning and response. It calls for a reframing of the way we currently identify and respond to outbreaks around a set of core behaviour-based response patterns. This new model moves away from the current risk communication focus on a plethora of agent-specific threats to five generic response patterns that are based on socially relevant response activities such as 1) controlling vectors, 2) enhancing hygiene, 3) isolation of the sick, 4) protection of the well, and 5) systemic protection of people and their environments. Emphasis is placed on gaining relevant insights into the context specific needs of different communities related to these five patterns. Governance structures are then built and evaluated based on their capacity to collect, communicate, share and prepare the public to take appropriate action related to the five different patterns before, during and after an event. Reframing risk communication and preparedness approaches around a better understanding of the determinants of these general behavioural patterns in infectious control could strengthen infection control literacy, response competence and build resilience of both individuals and health systems to address future epidemics, pandemics and other public health threats.
