Search

BackgroundIncreasing influenza vaccination coverage in school-aged children may substantially reduce community transmission. School-located influenza vaccinations (SLIV) aim to promote vaccinations by increasing accessibility, which may be especially beneficial to race/ethnicity groups that face high barriers to preventative care. Here, we evaluate the effectiveness of a city-wide SLIV program by race/ethnicity from 2014 to 2018.MethodsWe used multivariate matching to pair schools in the intervention district in Oakland, CA with schools in a comparison district in West Contra Costa County, CA. We distributed cross-sectional surveys to measure caregiver-reported student vaccination status and estimated differences in vaccination coverage levels and reasons for non-vaccination between districts stratifying by race/ethnicity. We estimated difference-in-differences (DID) of laboratory confirmed influenza hospitalization incidence between districts stratified by race/ethnicity using surveillance data.ResultsDifferences in influenza vaccination coverage in the intervention vs. comparison district were larger among White (2017-18: 21.0% difference [95% CI: 9.7%, 32.3%]) and Hispanic/Latino (13.4% [8.8%, 18.0%]) students than Asian/Pacific Islander (API) (8.9% [1.3%, 16.5%]), Black (5.9% [-2.2%, 14.0%]), and multiracial (6.3% [-1.8%, 14.3%)) students. Concerns about vaccine effectiveness or safety were more common among Black and multiracial caregivers. Logistical barriers were less common in the intervention vs. comparison district, with the largest difference among White students. In both districts, hospitalizations in 2017-18 were higher in Blacks (Intervention: 111.5 hospitalizations per 100,00; Comparison: 134.1 per 100,000) vs. other races/ethnicities. All-age influenza hospitalization incidence was lower in the intervention site vs. comparison site among White/API individuals in 2016-17 (DID -25.14 per 100,000 [95% CI: -40.14, -10.14]) and 2017-18 (-36.6 per 100,000 [-52.7, -20.5]) and Black older adults in 2017-18 (-282.2 per 100,000 (-508.4, -56.1]), but not in other groups.ConclusionsSLIV was associated with higher vaccination coverage and lower influenza hospitalization, but associations varied by race/ethnicity. SLIV alone may be insufficient to ensure equitable influenza outcomes.

BACKGROUND:It is estimated that vaccinating 50%-70% of school-aged children for influenza can produce population-wide indirect effects. We evaluated a city-wide school-located influenza vaccination (SLIV) intervention that aimed to increase influenza vaccination coverage. The intervention was implemented in ≥95 preschools and elementary schools in northern California from 2014 to 2018. Using a matched cohort design, we estimated intervention impacts on student influenza vaccination coverage, school absenteeism, and community-wide indirect effects on laboratory-confirmed influenza hospitalizations. METHODS AND FINDINGS:We used a multivariate matching algorithm to identify a nearby comparison school district with pre-intervention characteristics similar to those of the intervention school district and matched schools in each district. To measure student influenza vaccination, we conducted cross-sectional surveys of student caregivers in 22 school pairs (2017 survey, N = 6,070; 2018 survey, N = 6,507). We estimated the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza hospitalization from 2011 to 2018 using surveillance data from school district zip codes. We analyzed student absenteeism data from 2011 to 2018 from each district (N = 42,487,816 student-days). To account for pre-intervention differences between districts, we estimated difference-in-differences (DID) in influenza hospitalization incidence and absenteeism rates using generalized linear and log-linear models with a population offset for incidence outcomes. Prior to the SLIV intervention, the median household income was $51,849 in the intervention site and $61,596 in the comparison site. The population in each site was predominately white (41% in the intervention site, 48% in the comparison site) and/or of Hispanic or Latino ethnicity (26% in the intervention site, 33% in the comparison site). The number of students vaccinated by the SLIV intervention ranged from 7,502 to 10,106 (22%-28% of eligible students) each year. During the intervention, influenza vaccination coverage among elementary students was 53%-66% in the comparison district. Coverage was similar between the intervention and comparison districts in influenza seasons 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 and was significantly higher in the intervention site in seasons 2016-2017 (7%; 95% CI 4, 11; p < 0.001) and 2017-2018 (11%; 95% CI 7, 15; p < 0.001). During seasons when vaccination coverage was higher among intervention schools and the vaccine was moderately effective, there was evidence of statistically significant indirect effects: The DID in the incidence of influenza hospitalization per 100,000 in the intervention versus comparison site was -17 (95% CI -30, -4; p = 0.008) in 2016-2017 and -37 (95% CI -54, -19; p < 0.001) in 2017-2018 among non-elementary-school-aged individuals and -73 (95% CI -147, 1; p = 0.054) in 2016-2017 and -160 (95% CI -267, -53; p = 0.004) in 2017-2018 among adults 65 years or older. The DID in illness-related school absences per 100 school days during the influenza season was -0.63 (95% CI -1.14, -0.13; p = 0.014) in 2016-2017 and -0.80 (95% CI -1.28, -0.31; p = 0.001) in 2017-2018. Limitations of this study include the use of an observational design, which may be subject to unmeasured confounding, and caregiver-reported vaccination status, which is subject to poor recall and low response rates. CONCLUSIONS:A city-wide SLIV intervention in a large, diverse urban population was associated with a decrease in the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza hospitalization in all age groups and a decrease in illness-specific school absence rate among students in 2016-2017 and 2017-2018, seasons when the vaccine was moderately effective, suggesting that the intervention produced indirect effects. Our findings suggest that in populations with moderately high background levels of influenza vaccination coverage, SLIV programs are associated with further increases in coverage and reduced influenza across the community.

Importance: This large outbreak of foodborne salmonellosis demonstrated the complexity of investigating outbreaks linked to poultry products. The outbreak also highlighted the importance of efforts to strengthen food safety policies related to Salmonella in chicken parts and has implications for future changes within the poultry industry. Objective: To investigate a large multistate outbreak of multidrug resistant Salmonella Heidelberg infections. Design: Epidemiologic and laboratory investigations of patients infected with the outbreak strains of Salmonella Heidelberg and traceback of possible food exposures. Setting: United States. Outbreak period was March 1, 2013 through July 11, 2014 Patients: A case was defined as illness in a person infected with a laboratory-confirmed Salmonella Heidelberg with 1 of 7 outbreak pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) XbaI patterns with illness onset from March 1, 2013 through July 11, 2014. A total of 634 case-patients were identified through passive surveillance; 200/528 (38%) were hospitalized, none died. Results: Interviews were conducted with 435 case-patients: 371 (85%) reported eating any chicken in the 7 days before becoming ill. Of 273 case-patients interviewed with a focused questionnaire, 201 (74%) reported eating chicken prepared at home. Among case-patients with available brand information, 152 (87%) of 175 patients reported consuming Company A brand chicken. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was completed on 69 clinical isolates collected from case-patients; 67% were drug resistant, including 24 isolates (35%) that were multidrug resistant. The source of Company A brand chicken consumed by case-patients was traced back to 3 California production establishments from which 6 of 7 outbreak strains were isolated. Conclusions: Epidemiologic, laboratory, traceback, and environmental investigations conducted by local, state, and federal public health and regulatory officials indicated that consumption of Company A chicken was the cause of this outbreak. The outbreak involved multiple PFGE patterns, a variety of chicken products, and 3 production establishments, suggesting a reservoir for contamination upstream from the production establishments. Sources of bacteria and genes responsible for resistance, such as farms providing birds for slaughter or environmental reservoir on farms that raise chickens, might explain how multiple PFGE patterns were linked to chicken from 3 separate production establishments and many different poultry products. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]