IntroductionInappropriate antibiotic prescribing, such as that for viral illness, is common in primary care. This is of growing interest given concerns around antimicrobial resistance and harms associated with unnecessary treatment; however, current data limitations have hindered population-based estimates of the proportion of community-prescribed antibiotics attributable to common respiratory viruses.
Objectives and ApproachTo estimate the proportion of antibiotics prescribed in primary care to young children attributable to common respiratory viruses, including respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), influenza, human metapneumovirus (HuMPV) and parainfluenza. We leveraged two unique sources of comprehensive, linked population-based administrative data on dispensed antibiotic prescriptions and laboratory tests for respiratory viruses for all Scottish children (<5 years). We fit time series negative binomial models to predict weekly antibiotic prescribing rates from positive viral tests rates for the period April 1, 2009 through Dec 27, 2017. Using linked demographic and hospitalization data, we stratified our analysis by age, presence of high-risk chronic medical conditions, and antibiotic class.
ResultsWe included data on over 6 million antibiotic prescriptions among nearly 800,000 children. An estimated 6.9% (95% CI: 5.6,8.3), 2.4% (1.7,3.1), and 2.3% (0.8,3.9) of prescribed antibiotics were attributable to RSV, influenza and HuMPV, respectively. RSV was consistently associated with the highest proportion of antibiotics prescribed across all analyses but particularly among children without chronic conditions [4.30% (3.19, 5.41)] and for amoxicillin [8.10% (6.43, 9.76)] and macrolide prescriptions [7.65% (6.14, 9.16)].
Conclusion / ImplicationsNearly 14% of antibiotics prescribed to Scottish children in this study were attributable to common viral pathogens such as RSV for which antibiotics are not recommended. This highlights clear targets for antibiotic stewardship programs and suggests antibiotic prescribing could be reduced once an RSV vaccine is introduced.
This surveillance report summarises the information from the I-MOVE-COVID-19 hospital surveillance networks to monitor the COVID-19 pandemic in nine European countries. ; This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101003673
Between September 2017 and February 2018, influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2) and B viruses (mainly B/Yamagata, not included in 2017/18 trivalent vaccines) co-circulated in Europe. Interim results from five European studies indicate that, in all age groups, 2017/18 influenza vaccine effectiveness was 25 to 52% against any influenza, 55 to 68% against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, -42 to 7% against influenza A(H3N2) and 36 to 54% against influenza B. 2017/18 influenza vaccine should be promoted where influenza still circulates. ; Funding: The five studies have received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 634446 to conduct the study in individuals aged 65 years or more. ECDC has contributed to fund some study sites of the EU-PC study under the Framework contract No ECDC/2014/026 for the individuals aged less than 65 years. All study teams are very grateful to all patients, general practitioners, paediatricians, hospital teams, laboratory teams, regional epidemiologists who have contributed to the studies. We acknowledge the authors, originating and submitting laboratories of the sequences from GISAID's EpiFlu Database used for this study. All submitters of data may be contacted directly via the GISAID website www.gisaid.org ; Sí
Members of the I-MOVE+ working group - Portugal: B. Nunes, A. Machado, A.P. Rodrigues, V. Gómez, I. Kislaya, R. Guiomar, P. Pechirra, P. Cristóvão, I. Costa (National Health Institute Doutor Ricardo Jorge, Lisbon), A.Panarra, R. Côrte-Real (Centro Hospitalar de Lisboa Central, Lisbon), J. Poças, M.J. Peres (Centro Hospitalar de Setúbal, Setúbal). ; Between September 2017 and February 2018, influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, A(H3N2) and B viruses (mainly B/Yamagata, not included in 2017/18 trivalent vaccines) co-circulated in Europe. Interim results from five European studies indicate that, in all age groups, 2017/18 influenza vaccine effectiveness was 25 to 52% against any influenza, 55 to 68% against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09, -42 to 7% against influenza A(H3N2) and 36 to 54% against influenza B. 2017/18 influenza vaccine should be promoted where influenza still circulates. ; The five studies have received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 634446 to conduct the study in individuals aged 65 years or more. ECDC has contributed to fund some study sites of the EU-PC study under the Framework contract No ECDC/2014/026 for the individuals aged less than 65 years. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme (project number 13/34/14). EV was supported by the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government under grant (AUKCAR/14/03). This work is carried out with the support of the Asthma UK Centre for Applied Research (AUK-AC-2012–2001) and the Farr Institute. ; Peer reviewed ; Publisher PDF
Funding Information: This study is part of the EAVE II project. EAVE II is funded by the MRC (MR/R008345/1) with the support of BREATHE—The Health Data Research Hub for Respiratory Health (MC_PC_19004), which is funded through the UK Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund and delivered through Health Data Research UK. Additional support has been provided through Public Health Scotland and Scottish Government Director General Health and Social Care. The original EAVE project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme (11/46/23). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. We thank Dave Kelly from Albasoft (Inverness, UK) for his support with making primary care data available and James Pickett (Health Data Research UK, London, UK); Wendy Inglis-Humphrey, Vicky Hammersley, Laura Brook, Maria Georgiou, and Laura Gonzalez Rienda (University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK); and Pam McVeigh, Amanda Burridge, Sumedha Asnani-Chetal, and Afshin Dastafshan (Public Health Scotland, Glasgow, UK) for their support with project management and administration. ; Peer reviewed ; Publisher PDF
This study is part of the EAVE II project. EAVE II is funded by the MRC (MR/R008345/1) with the support of BREATHE—The Health Data Research Hub for Respiratory Health (MC_PC_19004), which is funded through the UK Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund and delivered through Health Data Research UK. Additional support has been provided through Public Health Scotland and Scottish Government Director General Health and Social Care. The original EAVE project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme (11/46/23). ; Background As the COVID-19 pandemic continues, national-level surveillance platforms with real-time individual person-level data are required to monitor and predict the epidemiological and clinical profile of COVID-19 and inform public health policy. We aimed to create a national dataset of patient-level data in Scotland to identify temporal trends and COVID-19 risk factors, and to develop a novel statistical prediction model to forecast COVID-19-related deaths and hospitalisations during the second wave. Methods We established a surveillance platform to monitor COVID-19 temporal trends using person-level primary care data (including age, sex, socioeconomic status, urban or rural residence, care home residence, and clinical risk factors) linked to data on SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests, hospitalisations, and deaths for all individuals resident in Scotland who were registered with a general practice on Feb 23, 2020. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the association between clinical risk groups and time to hospitalisation and death. A survival prediction model derived from data from March 1 to June 23, 2020, was created to forecast hospital admissions and deaths from October to December, 2020. We fitted a generalised additive spline model to daily SARS-CoV-2 cases over the previous 10 weeks and used this to create a 28-day forecast of the number of daily cases. The age and risk group pattern of cases in the previous 3 weeks was then used to select a stratified sample of individuals from our cohort who had not previously tested positive, with future cases in each group sampled from a multinomial distribution. We then used their patient characteristics (including age, sex, comorbidities, and socioeconomic status) to predict their probability of hospitalisation or death. Findings Our cohort included 5 384 819 people, representing 98·6% of the entire estimated population residing in Scotland during 2020. Hospitalisation and death among those testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 between March 1 and June 23, 2020, were associated with several patient characteristics, including male sex (hospitalisation hazard ratio [HR] 1·47, 95% CI 1·38–1·57; death HR 1·62, 1·49–1·76) and various comorbidities, with the highest hospitalisation HR found for transplantation (4·53, 1·87–10·98) and the highest death HR for myoneural disease (2·33, 1·46–3·71). For those testing positive, there were decreasing temporal trends in hospitalisation and death rates. The proportion of positive tests among older age groups (>40 years) and those with at-risk comorbidities increased during October, 2020. On Nov 10, 2020, the projected number of hospitalisations for Dec 8, 2020 (28 days later) was 90 per day (95% prediction interval 55–125) and the projected number of deaths was 21 per day (12–29). Interpretation The estimated incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection based on positive tests recorded in this unique data resource has provided forecasts of hospitalisation and death rates for the whole of Scotland. These findings were used by the Scottish Government to inform their response to reduce COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality. ; Publisher PDF ; Peer reviewed
This study is part of the EAVE II project. EAVE II is funded by the MRC (MR/R008345/1) with the support of BREATHE—The Health Data Research Hub for Respiratory Health (MC_PC_19004), which is funded through the UK Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund and delivered through Health Data Research UK. Additional support has been provided through Public Health Scotland and Scottish Government Director General Health and Social Care. The original EAVE project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme (11/46/23). ; Background As the COVID-19 pandemic continues, national-level surveillance platforms with real-time individual person-level data are required to monitor and predict the epidemiological and clinical profile of COVID-19 and inform public health policy. We aimed to create a national dataset of patient-level data in Scotland to identify temporal trends and COVID-19 risk factors, and to develop a novel statistical prediction model to forecast COVID-19-related deaths and hospitalisations during the second wave. Methods We established a surveillance platform to monitor COVID-19 temporal trends using person-level primary care data (including age, sex, socioeconomic status, urban or rural residence, care home residence, and clinical risk factors) linked to data on SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests, hospitalisations, and deaths for all individuals resident in Scotland who were registered with a general practice on Feb 23, 2020. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the association between clinical risk groups and time to hospitalisation and death. A survival prediction model derived from data from March 1 to June 23, 2020, was created to forecast hospital admissions and deaths from October to December, 2020. We fitted a generalised additive spline model to daily SARS-CoV-2 cases over the previous 10 weeks and used this to create a 28-day forecast of the number of daily cases. The age and risk group pattern of cases in the previous 3 weeks was then used to select a ...
Financial support. The work was funded by the Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government under the grant (AUKCAR/14/03) and the NIHR–Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme (13/34/14) for the Seasonal Influenza Vaccination Effectiveness II (SIVE II) study. As principal investigator, C. R. S. received a grant for the SIVE-II project from the NIHR HTA. This work was carried out with the support of the Asthma UK Centre for Applied Research (AUK-AC-2012-01), the Farr Institute (MR/M501633/2), Health Data Research UK (an initiative funded by UK Research and Innovation, Department of Health and Social Care England and the devolved administrations and leading medical research charities), the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (under grant agreement No 634446) and European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (Influenza-Monitoring Vaccine Effectiveness). Acknowledgments. The authors thank and acknowledge all colleagues at the Asthma UK Centre for Applied Research for their support in this study. Disclaimer. The funding bodies had no role in the design of the study, review process, analysis, interpretation, or reporting of data. The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Health Technology Assessment Programme, National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), National Health Service, or the Department of Health. Potential conflicts of interest. The authors: No reported conflicts of interest. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed. ; Peer reviewed ; Publisher PDF ; Publisher PDF
This study is part of the EAVE II project. EAVE II is funded by the MRC (MC_PC_19075) with the support of BREATHE—The Health Data Research Hub for Respiratory Health (MC_PC_19004), which is funded through the UK Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund and delivered through Health Data Research UK. This research is part of the Data and Connectivity National Core Study, led by Health Data Research UK in partnership with the Office for National Statistics and funded by UK Research and Innovation (MC_PC_20058). Additional support has been provided through Public Health Scotland, the Scottish Government Director General Health and Social Care, and the University of Edinburgh. The original EAVE project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (11/46/23). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR, the Department of Health and Social Care, or the UK Government. We thank Dave Kelly from Albasoft (Inverness, UK) for his support with making primary care data available, and Wendy Inglis-Humphrey, Vicky Hammersley, and Laura Brook (University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK) for their support with project management and administration. ; Peer reviewed ; Publisher PDF
In: Bulletin of the World Health Organization: the international journal of public health = Bulletin de l'Organisation Mondiale de la Santé, Volume 99, Issue 3, p. 178-189
Reports suggest that COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness is decreasing, but whether this reflects waning or new SARS-CoV-2 variants-especially delta (B.1.617.2)-is unclear. We investigated the association between time since two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine and risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes in Scotland (where delta was dominant), with comparative analyses in Brazil (where delta was uncommon). In this retrospective, population-based cohort study in Brazil and Scotland, we linked national databases from the EAVE II study in Scotland; and the COVID-19 Vaccination Campaign, Acute Respiratory Infection Suspected Cases, and Severe Acute Respiratory Infection/Illness datasets in Brazil) for vaccination, laboratory testing, clinical, and mortality data. We defined cohorts of adults (aged ≥18 years) who received two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and compared rates of severe COVID-19 outcomes (ie, COVID-19 hospital admission or death) across fortnightly periods, relative to 2-3 weeks after the second dose. Entry to the Scotland cohort started from May 19, 2021, and entry to the Brazil cohort started from Jan 18, 2021. Follow-up in both cohorts was until Oct 25, 2021. Poisson regression was used to estimate rate ratios (RRs) and vaccine effectiveness, with 95% CIs. 1 972 454 adults received two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 in Scotland and 42 558 839 in Brazil, with longer follow-up in Scotland because two-dose vaccination began earlier in Scotland than in Brazil. In Scotland, RRs for severe COVID-19 increased to 2·01 (95% CI 1·54-2·62) at 10-11 weeks, 3·01 (2·26-3·99) at 14-15 weeks, and 5·43 (4·00-7·38) at 18-19 weeks after the second dose. The pattern of results was similar in Brazil, with RRs of 2·29 (2·01-2·61) at 10-11 weeks, 3·10 (2·63-3·64) at 14-15 weeks, and 4·71 (3·83-5·78) at 18-19 weeks after the second dose. In Scotland, vaccine effectiveness decreased from 83·7% (95% CI 79·7-87·0) at 2-3 weeks, to 75·9% (72·9-78·6) at 14-15 weeks, and 63·7% (59·6-67·4) at 18-19 weeks after the second dose. In Brazil, vaccine effectiveness decreased from 86·4% (85·4-87·3) at 2-3 weeks, to 59·7% (54·6-64·2) at 14-15 weeks, and 42·2% (32·4-50·6) at 18-19 weeks. We found waning vaccine protection of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 against COVID-19 hospital admissions and deaths in both Scotland and Brazil, this becoming evident within three months of the second vaccine dose. Consideration needs to be given to providing booster vaccine doses for people who have received ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council), Scottish Government, Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund, Health Data Research UK, Fiocruz, Fazer o Bem Faz Bem Programme; Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico, Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. For the Portuguese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.
Funding : UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council), Scottish Government, Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund, Health Data Research UK, Fiocruz, Fazer o Bem Faz Bem Programme; Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico, Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. ; Background Reports suggest that COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness is decreasing, but whether this reflects waning or new SARS-CoV-2 variants—especially delta (B.1.617.2)—is unclear. We investigated the association between time since two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine and risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes in Scotland (where delta was dominant), with comparative analyses in Brazil (where delta was uncommon). Methods In this retrospective, population-based cohort study in Brazil and Scotland, we linked national databases from the EAVE II study in Scotland; and the COVID-19 Vaccination Campaign, Acute Respiratory Infection Suspected Cases, and Severe Acute Respiratory Infection/Illness datasets in Brazil) for vaccination, laboratory testing, clinical, and mortality data. We defined cohorts of adults (aged ≥18 years) who received two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and compared rates of severe COVID-19 outcomes (ie, COVID-19 hospital admission or death) across fortnightly periods, relative to 2–3 weeks after the second dose. Entry to the Scotland cohort started from May 19, 2021, and entry to the Brazil cohort started from Jan 18, 2021. Follow-up in both cohorts was until Oct 25, 2021. Poisson regression was used to estimate rate ratios (RRs) and vaccine effectiveness, with 95% CIs. Findings 1 972 454 adults received two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 in Scotland and 42 558 839 in Brazil, with longer follow-up in Scotland because two-dose vaccination began earlier in Scotland than in Brazil. In Scotland, RRs for severe COVID-19 increased to 2·01 (95% CI 1·54–2·62) at 10–11 weeks, 3·01 (2·26–3·99) at 14–15 weeks, and 5·43 (4·00–7·38) at 18–19 weeks after the second dose. The pattern of results was similar in Brazil, with RRs of 2·29 (2·01–2·61) at 10–11 weeks, 3·10 (2·63–3·64) at 14–15 weeks, and 4·71 (3·83–5·78) at 18–19 weeks after the second dose. In Scotland, vaccine effectiveness decreased from 83·7% (95% CI 79·7–87·0) at 2–3 weeks, to 75·9% (72·9–78·6) at 14–15 weeks, and 63·7% (59·6–67·4) at 18–19 weeks after the second dose. In Brazil, vaccine effectiveness decreased from 86·4% (85·4–87·3) at 2–3 weeks, to 59·7% (54·6–64·2) at 14–15 weeks, and 42·2% (32·4–50·6) at 18–19 weeks. Interpretation We found waning vaccine protection of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 against COVID-19 hospital admissions and deaths in both Scotland and Brazil, this becoming evident within three months of the second vaccine dose. Consideration needs to be given to providing booster vaccine doses for people who have received ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. ; Publisher PDF ; Peer reviewed
Background: Reports suggest that COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness is decreasing, but whether this reflects waning or new SARS-CoV-2 variants—especially delta (B.1.617.2)—is unclear. We investigated the association between time since two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine and risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes in Scotland (where delta was dominant), with comparative analyses in Brazil (where delta was uncommon). Methods: In this retrospective, population-based cohort study in Brazil and Scotland, we linked national databases from the EAVE II study in Scotland; and the COVID-19 Vaccination Campaign, Acute Respiratory Infection Suspected Cases, and Severe Acute Respiratory Infection/Illness datasets in Brazil) for vaccination, laboratory testing, clinical, and mortality data. We defined cohorts of adults (aged ≥18 years) who received two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and compared rates of severe COVID-19 outcomes (ie, COVID-19 hospital admission or death) across fortnightly periods, relative to 2–3 weeks after the second dose. Entry to the Scotland cohort started from May 19, 2021, and entry to the Brazil cohort started from Jan 18, 2021. Follow-up in both cohorts was until Oct 25, 2021. Poisson regression was used to estimate rate ratios (RRs) and vaccine effectiveness, with 95% CIs. Findings: 1 972 454 adults received two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 in Scotland and 42 558 839 in Brazil, with longer follow-up in Scotland because two-dose vaccination began earlier in Scotland than in Brazil. In Scotland, RRs for severe COVID-19 increased to 2·01 (95% CI 1·54–2·62) at 10–11 weeks, 3·01 (2·26–3·99) at 14–15 weeks, and 5·43 (4·00–7·38) at 18–19 weeks after the second dose. The pattern of results was similar in Brazil, with RRs of 2·29 (2·01–2·61) at 10–11 weeks, 3·10 (2·63–3·64) at 14–15 weeks, and 4·71 (3·83–5·78) at 18–19 weeks after the second dose. In Scotland, vaccine effectiveness decreased from 83·7% (95% CI 79·7–87·0) at 2–3 weeks, to 75·9% (72·9–78·6) at 14–15 weeks, and 63·7% (59·6–67·4) at 18–19 weeks after the second dose. In Brazil, vaccine effectiveness decreased from 86·4% (85·4–87·3) at 2–3 weeks, to 59·7% (54·6–64·2) at 14–15 weeks, and 42·2% (32·4–50·6) at 18–19 weeks. Interpretation: We found waning vaccine protection of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 against COVID-19 hospital admissions and deaths in both Scotland and Brazil, this becoming evident within three months of the second vaccine dose. Consideration needs to be given to providing booster vaccine doses for people who have received ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. Funding: UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council), Scottish Government, Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund, Health Data Research UK, Fiocruz, Fazer o Bem Faz Bem Programme; Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico, Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. Translation: For the Portuguese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.
