Suchergebnisse

International audience ; BackgroundInfluenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infections are responsible for substantial global morbidity and mortality in young children and elderly individuals. Estimates of the burden of influenza- and RSV-associated hospitalization are limited in Africa.MethodsWe conducted hospital-based surveillance for laboratory-confirmed influenza- and RSV-associated severe acute respiratory illness (SARI) among patients of any age at one hospital and a retrospective review of SARI hospitalizations in five hospitals situated in Antananarivo during 2011-2016. We estimated age-specific rates (per 100 000 population) of influenza- and RSV-associated SARI hospitalizations for the Antananarivo region and then extrapolated these rates to the national level.ResultsOverall, the mean annual national number of influenza-associated SARI hospitalizations for all age groups was 6609 (95% CI: 5381-7835-rate: 30.0; 95% CI: 24.4-35.6), 4468 (95% CI: 3796-5102-rate: 127.6; 95% CI: 108.4-145.7), 2141 (95% CI: 1585-2734-rate: 11.6; 95% CI: 8.6-14.8), and 339 (95% CI: 224-459-rate: 50.0; 95% CI: 36.3-74.4) among individuals aged <5, ≥5, and ≥65 years, respectively. For these same age groups, the mean annual number of RSV-associated SARI hospitalizations was 11 768 (95% CI: 10 553-12 997-rate: 53.4; 95% CI: 47.9-59.0), 11 299 (95% CI: 10 350-12 214-rate: 322.7; 95% CI: 295.6-348.8), 469 (95% CI: 203-783-rate: 2.5;95% CI: 1.1-4.2), and 36 (95% CI: 0-84-rate: 5.8; 0.0-13.5), respectively.ConclusionThe burden of influenza- and RSV-associated SARI hospitalization was high among children aged <5 years. These first estimates for Madagascar will enable government to make informed evidence-based decisions when allocating scarce resources and planning intervention strategies to limit the impact and spread of these viruses

International audience ; BackgroundInfluenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infections are responsible for substantial global morbidity and mortality in young children and elderly individuals. Estimates of the burden of influenza- and RSV-associated hospitalization are limited in Africa.MethodsWe conducted hospital-based surveillance for laboratory-confirmed influenza- and RSV-associated severe acute respiratory illness (SARI) among patients of any age at one hospital and a retrospective review of SARI hospitalizations in five hospitals situated in Antananarivo during 2011-2016. We estimated age-specific rates (per 100 000 population) of influenza- and RSV-associated SARI hospitalizations for the Antananarivo region and then extrapolated these rates to the national level.ResultsOverall, the mean annual national number of influenza-associated SARI hospitalizations for all age groups was 6609 (95% CI: 5381-7835-rate: 30.0; 95% CI: 24.4-35.6), 4468 (95% CI: 3796-5102-rate: 127.6; 95% CI: 108.4-145.7), 2141 (95% CI: 1585-2734-rate: 11.6; 95% CI: 8.6-14.8), and 339 (95% CI: 224-459-rate: 50.0; 95% CI: 36.3-74.4) among individuals aged <5, ≥5, and ≥65 years, respectively. For these same age groups, the mean annual number of RSV-associated SARI hospitalizations was 11 768 (95% CI: 10 553-12 997-rate: 53.4; 95% CI: 47.9-59.0), 11 299 (95% CI: 10 350-12 214-rate: 322.7; 95% CI: 295.6-348.8), 469 (95% CI: 203-783-rate: 2.5;95% CI: 1.1-4.2), and 36 (95% CI: 0-84-rate: 5.8; 0.0-13.5), respectively.ConclusionThe burden of influenza- and RSV-associated SARI hospitalization was high among children aged <5 years. These first estimates for Madagascar will enable government to make informed evidence-based decisions when allocating scarce resources and planning intervention strategies to limit the impact and spread of these viruses

International audience ; BackgroundInfluenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infections are responsible for substantial global morbidity and mortality in young children and elderly individuals. Estimates of the burden of influenza- and RSV-associated hospitalization are limited in Africa.MethodsWe conducted hospital-based surveillance for laboratory-confirmed influenza- and RSV-associated severe acute respiratory illness (SARI) among patients of any age at one hospital and a retrospective review of SARI hospitalizations in five hospitals situated in Antananarivo during 2011-2016. We estimated age-specific rates (per 100 000 population) of influenza- and RSV-associated SARI hospitalizations for the Antananarivo region and then extrapolated these rates to the national level.ResultsOverall, the mean annual national number of influenza-associated SARI hospitalizations for all age groups was 6609 (95% CI: 5381-7835-rate: 30.0; 95% CI: 24.4-35.6), 4468 (95% CI: 3796-5102-rate: 127.6; 95% CI: 108.4-145.7), 2141 (95% CI: 1585-2734-rate: 11.6; 95% CI: 8.6-14.8), and 339 (95% CI: 224-459-rate: 50.0; 95% CI: 36.3-74.4) among individuals aged <5, ≥5, and ≥65 years, respectively. For these same age groups, the mean annual number of RSV-associated SARI hospitalizations was 11 768 (95% CI: 10 553-12 997-rate: 53.4; 95% CI: 47.9-59.0), 11 299 (95% CI: 10 350-12 214-rate: 322.7; 95% CI: 295.6-348.8), 469 (95% CI: 203-783-rate: 2.5;95% CI: 1.1-4.2), and 36 (95% CI: 0-84-rate: 5.8; 0.0-13.5), respectively.ConclusionThe burden of influenza- and RSV-associated SARI hospitalization was high among children aged <5 years. These first estimates for Madagascar will enable government to make informed evidence-based decisions when allocating scarce resources and planning intervention strategies to limit the impact and spread of these viruses

BACKGROUND: Influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infections are responsible for substantial global morbidity and mortality in young children and elderly individuals. Estimates of the burden of influenza‐ and RSV‐associated hospitalization are limited in Africa. METHODS: We conducted hospital‐based surveillance for laboratory‐confirmed influenza‐ and RSV‐associated severe acute respiratory illness (SARI) among patients of any age at one hospital and a retrospective review of SARI hospitalizations in five hospitals situated in Antananarivo during 2011‐2016. We estimated age‐specific rates (per 100 000 population) of influenza‐ and RSV‐associated SARI hospitalizations for the Antananarivo region and then extrapolated these rates to the national level. RESULTS: Overall, the mean annual national number of influenza‐associated SARI hospitalizations for all age groups was 6609 (95% CI: 5381‐7835‐rate: 30.0; 95% CI: 24.4‐35.6), 4468 (95% CI: 3796‐5102‐rate: 127.6; 95% CI: 108.4‐145.7), 2141 (95% CI: 1585‐2734‐rate: 11.6; 95% CI: 8.6‐14.8), and 339 (95% CI: 224‐459‐rate: 50.0; 95% CI: 36.3‐74.4) among individuals aged <5, ≥5, and ≥65 years, respectively. For these same age groups, the mean annual number of RSV‐associated SARI hospitalizations was 11 768 (95% CI: 10 553‐12 997‐rate: 53.4; 95% CI: 47.9‐59.0), 11 299 (95% CI: 10 350‐12 214‐rate: 322.7; 95% CI: 295.6‐348.8), 469 (95% CI: 203‐783‐rate: 2.5;95% CI: 1.1‐4.2), and 36 (95% CI: 0‐84‐rate: 5.8; 0.0‐13.5), respectively. CONCLUSION: The burden of influenza‐ and RSV‐associated SARI hospitalization was high among children aged <5 years. These first estimates for Madagascar will enable government to make informed evidence‐based decisions when allocating scarce resources and planning intervention strategies to limit the impact and spread of these viruses.

International audience ; Responses to the early (February–July 2020) COVID-19 pandemic varied widely, globally. Reasons for this are multiple but likely relate to the healthcare and financial resources then available, and the degree of trust in, and economic support provided by, national governments. Cultural factors also affected how different populations reacted to the various pandemic restrictions, like masking, social distancing and self-isolation or self-quarantine. The degree of compliance with these measures depended on how much individuals valued their needs and liberties over those of their society. Thus, several themes may be relevant when comparing pandemic responses across different regions. East and Southeast Asian populations tended to be more collectivist and self-sacrificing, responding quickly to early signs of the pandemic and readily complied with most restrictions to control its spread. Australasian, Eastern European, Scandinavian, some Middle Eastern, African and South American countries also responded promptly by imposing restrictions of varying severity, due to concerns for their wider society, including for some, the fragility of their healthcare systems. Western European and North American countries, with well-resourced healthcare systems, initially reacted more slowly, partly in an effort to maintain their economies but also todelay imposing pandemic restrictions that limited the personal freedoms of their citizens.

International audience ; Responses to the early (February–July 2020) COVID-19 pandemic varied widely, globally. Reasons for this are multiple but likely relate to the healthcare and financial resources then available, and the degree of trust in, and economic support provided by, national governments. Cultural factors also affected how different populations reacted to the various pandemic restrictions, like masking, social distancing and self-isolation or self-quarantine. The degree of compliance with these measures depended on how much individuals valued their needs and liberties over those of their society. Thus, several themes may be relevant when comparing pandemic responses across different regions. East and Southeast Asian populations tended to be more collectivist and self-sacrificing, responding quickly to early signs of the pandemic and readily complied with most restrictions to control its spread. Australasian, Eastern European, Scandinavian, some Middle Eastern, African and South American countries also responded promptly by imposing restrictions of varying severity, due to concerns for their wider society, including for some, the fragility of their healthcare systems. Western European and North American countries, with well-resourced healthcare systems, initially reacted more slowly, partly in an effort to maintain their economies but also todelay imposing pandemic restrictions that limited the personal freedoms of their citizens.

International audience ; Responses to the early (February–July 2020) COVID-19 pandemic varied widely, globally. Reasons for this are multiple but likely relate to the healthcare and financial resources then available, and the degree of trust in, and economic support provided by, national governments. Cultural factors also affected how different populations reacted to the various pandemic restrictions, like masking, social distancing and self-isolation or self-quarantine. The degree of compliance with these measures depended on how much individuals valued their needs and liberties over those of their society. Thus, several themes may be relevant when comparing pandemic responses across different regions. East and Southeast Asian populations tended to be more collectivist and self-sacrificing, responding quickly to early signs of the pandemic and readily complied with most restrictions to control its spread. Australasian, Eastern European, Scandinavian, some Middle Eastern, African and South American countries also responded promptly by imposing restrictions of varying severity, due to concerns for their wider society, including for some, the fragility of their healthcare systems. Western European and North American countries, with well-resourced healthcare systems, initially reacted more slowly, partly in an effort to maintain their economies but also todelay imposing pandemic restrictions that limited the personal freedoms of their citizens.

International audience ; Responses to the early (February–July 2020) COVID-19 pandemic varied widely, globally. Reasons for this are multiple but likely relate to the healthcare and financial resources then available, and the degree of trust in, and economic support provided by, national governments. Cultural factors also affected how different populations reacted to the various pandemic restrictions, like masking, social distancing and self-isolation or self-quarantine. The degree of compliance with these measures depended on how much individuals valued their needs and liberties over those of their society. Thus, several themes may be relevant when comparing pandemic responses across different regions. East and Southeast Asian populations tended to be more collectivist and self-sacrificing, responding quickly to early signs of the pandemic and readily complied with most restrictions to control its spread. Australasian, Eastern European, Scandinavian, some Middle Eastern, African and South American countries also responded promptly by imposing restrictions of varying severity, due to concerns for their wider society, including for some, the fragility of their healthcare systems. Western European and North American countries, with well-resourced healthcare systems, initially reacted more slowly, partly in an effort to maintain their economies but also todelay imposing pandemic restrictions that limited the personal freedoms of their citizens.

Responses to the early (February–July 2020) COVID-19 pandemic varied widely, globally. Reasons for this are multiple but likely relate to the healthcare and financial resources then available, and the degree of trust in, and economic support provided by, national governments. Cultural factors also affected how different populations reacted to the various pandemic restrictions, like masking, social distancing and self-isolation or self-quarantine. The degree of compliance with these measures depended on how much individuals valued their needs and liberties over those of their society. Thus, several themes may be relevant when comparing pandemic responses across different regions. East and Southeast Asian populations tended to be more collectivist and self-sacrificing, responding quickly to early signs of the pandemic and readily complied with most restrictions to control its spread. Australasian, Eastern European, Scandinavian, some Middle Eastern, African and South American countries also responded promptly by imposing restrictions of varying severity, due to concerns for their wider society, including for some, the fragility of their healthcare systems. Western European and North American countries, with well-resourced healthcare systems, initially reacted more slowly, partly in an effort to maintain their economies but also to delay imposing pandemic restrictions that limited the personal freedoms of their citizens.