Suchergebnisse

Background Molecular typing and whole genome sequencing (WGS) information is used for (inter-) national outbreak investigations. To assist the implementation of these techniques for tuberculosis (TB) surveillance and outbreak investigations at European level there is a need for inter-country collaboration and standardization. This demands more information on molecular typing practices and capabilities of individual countries. We aimed to review the use of molecular/genomic typing for TB surveillance in European Union and European Economic Area countries in 2016; assess its public health value; and collect experiences on typing data use for cross-border cluster investigations. Method A web-based questionnaire was provided to all TB National Focal Points. The questionnaire consisted of three parts: i) Use and integration of molecular and genomic typing data into TB surveillance; ii) Cross-border cluster investigation and international collaboration, and iii) Perception and evaluation of public health benefits of molecular and genomic typing for TB surveillance. Results Of 26 responding countries, 20 used molecular typing for TB surveillance, including nine applying WGS. The level of integration into the national surveillance was heterogeneous. Among six countries not using typing for TB surveillance, more than half planned its implementation soon. Overall, most countries perceived an added public health value of molecular typing for TB control. Concerning international cluster investigations, countries had little experience and did not have standard protocols to exchange typing data. Conclusion Our study shows a wide use of molecular and genomic typing data for TB surveillance in EU/EEA countries and reveals that transition to WGS-based typing is ongoing or is considered in most countries. However, our results also show a high heterogeneity in the use and integration of typing data for TB surveillance. Standardization of typing data use for TB surveillance is needed and formal procedures should be developed to ...

BACKGROUND: The extent to which people implement government-issued protective measures is critical in preventing further spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. Our study aimed to describe the public belief in the effectiveness of protective measures, the reported implementation of these measures, and to identify communication channels used to acquire information on COVID-19 in European countries during the early stage of the pandemic. METHODS AND FINDINGS: An online survey available in multiple languages was disseminated starting on March 19th, 2020. After five days, we computed descriptive statistics for countries with more than 500 respondents. Each day, we assessed enacted community containment measures by stage of stringency (I-IV). In total, 9,796 adults responded, of whom 8,611 resided in the Netherlands (stage III), 604 in Germany (stage III), and 581 in Italy (stage IV). To explore possible dynamics as containment strategies intensified, we also included 1,365 responses submitted during the following week. Participants indicated support for governmental measures related to avoiding social gatherings, selective closure of public places, and hand hygiene and respiratory measures (range for all measures: 95.0%-99.7%). Respondents from the Netherlands less frequently considered a complete social lockdown effective (59.2%), compared to respondents in Germany (76.6%) or Italy (87.2%). Italian residents applied enforced social distancing measures more frequently (range: 90.2%-99.3%, German and Dutch residents: 67.5%-97.0%) and self-initiated hygienic and social distancing behaviors (range: 36.3%-96.6%, German and Dutch residents: 28.3%-95.7%). Respondents reported being sufficiently informed about the outbreak and behaviors to avoid infection (range: 90.2%-91.1%). Information channels most commonly reported included television newspapers, official health websites, and social media. One week later, we observed no major differences in submitted responses. CONCLUSIONS: During the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic, belief in the effectiveness of protective measures among survey respondents from three European countries was high and participants reported feeling sufficiently informed. In March 2020, implementation of measures differed between countries and were highest among respondents from Italy, who were subjected to the most stringent lockdown measures and greatest COVID-19 burden in Europe during this period.

Background: The extent to which people implement government-issued protective measures is critical in preventing further spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by coronavirus SARS-CoV-2. Our study aimed to describe the public belief in the effectiveness of protective measures, the reported implementation of these measures, and to identify communication channels used to acquire information on COVID-19 in European countries during the early stage of the pandemic. Methods and findings: An online survey available in multiple languages was disseminated starting on March 19th, 2020. After five days, we computed descriptive statistics for countries with more than 500 respondents. Each day, we assessed enacted community containment measures by stage of stringency (I-IV). In total, 9,796 adults responded, of whom 8,611 resided in the Netherlands (stage III), 604 in Germany (stage III), and 581 in Italy (stage IV). To explore possible dynamics as containment strategies intensified, we also included 1,365 responses submitted during the following week. Participants indicated support for governmental measures related to avoiding social gatherings, selective closure of public places, and hand hygiene and respiratory measures (range for all measures: 95.0%-99.7%). Respondents from the Netherlands less frequently considered a complete social lockdown effective (59.2%), compared to respondents in Germany (76.6%) or Italy (87.2%). Italian residents applied enforced social distancing measures more frequently (range: 90.2%-99.3%, German and Dutch residents: 67.5%-97.0%) and self-initiated hygienic and social distancing behaviors (range: 36.3%-96.6%, German and Dutch residents: 28.3%-95.7%). Respondents reported being sufficiently informed about the outbreak and behaviors to avoid infection (range: 90.2%-91.1%). Information channels most commonly reported included television newspapers, official health websites, and social media. One week later, we observed no major differences in submitted responses. Conclusions: ...