Search

Mitigation measures, including stay-at-home orders and public mask wearing, together with routine public health interventions such as case investigation with contact tracing and immediate self-quarantine after exposure, are recommended to prevent and control the transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) (1-3). On March 11, the first COVID-19 case in Delaware was reported to the Delaware Division of Public Health (DPH). The state responded to ongoing community transmission with investigation of all identified cases (commencing March 11), issuance of statewide stay-at-home orders (March 24-June 1), a statewide public mask mandate (from April 28), and contact tracing (starting May 12). The relationship among implementation of mitigation strategies, case investigations, and contact tracing and COVID-19 incidence and associated hospitalization and mortality was examined during March-June 2020. Incidence declined by 82%, hospitalization by 88%, and mortality by 100% from late April to June 2020, as the mask mandate and contact tracing were added to case investigations and the stay-at-home order. Among 9,762 laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases reported during March 11-June 25, 2020, two thirds (6,527; 67%) of patients were interviewed, and 5,823 (60%) reported completing isolation. Among 2,834 contacts reported, 882 (31%) were interviewed and among these contacts, 721 (82%) reported completing quarantine. Implementation of mitigation measures, including mandated mask use coupled with public health interventions, was followed by reductions in COVID-19 incidence and associated hospitalizations and mortality. The combination of state-mandated community mitigation efforts and routine public health interventions can reduce the occurrence of new COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths.

Wearing masks is a CDC-recommended* approach to reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), by reducing the spread of respiratory droplets into the air when a person coughs, sneezes, or talks and by reducing the inhalation of these droplets by the wearer. On July 2, 2020, the governor of Kansas issued an executive order† (state mandate), effective July 3, requiring masks or other face coverings in public spaces. CDC and the Kansas Department of Health and Environment analyzed trends in county-level COVID-19 incidence before (June 1-July 2) and after (July 3-August 23) the governor's executive order among counties that ultimately had a mask mandate in place and those that did not. As of August 11, 24 of Kansas's 105 counties did not opt out of the state mandate§ or adopted their own mask mandate shortly before or after the state mandate was issued; 81 counties opted out of the state mandate, as permitted by state law, and did not adopt their own mask mandate. After the governor's executive order, COVID-19 incidence (calculated as the 7-day rolling average number of new daily cases per 100,000 population) decreased (mean decrease of 0.08 cases per 100,000 per day; net decrease of 6%) among counties with a mask mandate (mandated counties) but continued to increase (mean increase of 0.11 cases per 100,000 per day; net increase of 100%) among counties without a mask mandate (nonmandated counties). The decrease in cases among mandated counties and the continued increase in cases in nonmandated counties adds to the evidence supporting the importance of wearing masks and implementing policies requiring their use to mitigate the spread of SARS-CoV-2 (1-6). Community-level mitigation strategies emphasizing wearing masks, maintaining physical distance, staying at home when ill, and enhancing hygiene practices can help reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2.

During July 2-August 11, 2020, an outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) occurred at a boys' overnight summer school retreat in Wisconsin. The retreat included 152 high school-aged boys, counselors, and staff members from 21 states and territories and two foreign countries. All attendees were required to provide documentation of either a positive serologic test result* within the past 3 months or a negative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) tests result for SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that causes COVID-19) ≤7 days before travel, to self-quarantine within their households for 7 days before travel, and to wear masks during travel. On July 15, the Wisconsin Department of Health Services (WDHS) began an investigation after being notified that two students at the retreat had received positive SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR test results. WDHS offered RT-PCR testing to attendees on July 28 and serologic testing on August 5 and 6. Seventy-eight (51%) attendees received positive RT-PCR results (confirmed cases), and 38 (25%) met clinical criteria for COVID-19 without a positive RT-PCR result (probable cases). By the end of the retreat, 118 (78%) persons had received a positive serologic test result. Among 24 attendees with a documented positive serologic test result before the retreat, all received negative RT-PCR results. After RT-PCR testing on July 28, WDHS recommended that remaining susceptible persons (asymptomatic and with negative RT-PCR test results) quarantine from other students and staff members at the retreat. Recommended end dates for isolation or quarantine were based on established guidance (1,2) and determined in coordination with CDC. All attendees were cleared for interstate and commercial air travel to return home on August 11. This outbreak investigation documented rapid spread of SARS-CoV-2, likely from a single student, among adolescents and young adults in a congregate setting. Mitigation plans that include prearrival quarantine and testing, cohorting, symptom monitoring, early identification and isolation of cases, mask use, enhanced hygiene and disinfection practices, and maximal outdoor programming are necessary to prevent COVID-19 outbreaks in these settings (3,4).

Background Detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection has principally been performed through the use of real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction testing. Results of such tests can be reported as cycle threshold (Ct) values, which may provide semi-quantitative or indirect measurements of viral load. Previous reports have examined temporal trends in Ct values over the course of a SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods Using testing data collected during a prospective household transmission investigation of outpatient and mild coronavirus disease 2019 cases, we examined the relationships between Ct values of the viral RNA N1 target and demographic, clinical, and epidemiological characteristics collected through participant interviews and daily symptom diaries. Results We found that Ct values are lowest (corresponding to a higher viral RNA concentration) soon after symptom onset and are significantly correlated with the time elapsed since onset (P Conclusions These results emphasize the importance of early testing for SARS-CoV-2 among individuals with symptoms of respiratory illness, and allow cases to be identified and isolated when their viral shedding may be highest.

Background The evidence base for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) is nascent. We sought to characterize SARS-CoV-2 transmission within US households and estimate the household secondary infection rate (SIR) to inform strategies to reduce transmission. Methods We recruited patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and their household contacts in Utah and Wisconsin during 22 March 2020–25 April 2020. We interviewed patients and all household contacts to obtain demographics and medical histories. At the initial household visit, 14 days later, and when a household contact became newly symptomatic, we collected respiratory swabs from patients and household contacts for testing by SARS-CoV-2 real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) and sera for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies testing by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). We estimated SIR and odds ratios (ORs) to assess risk factors for secondary infection, defined by a positive rRT-PCR or ELISA test. Results Thirty-two (55%) of 58 households secondary infection among household contacts. The SIR was 29% (n = 55/188; 95% confidence interval [CI], 23%–36%) overall, 42% among children (aged Conclusions We found substantial evidence of secondary infections among household contacts. People with COVID-19, particularly those with immunocompromising conditions or those with household contacts with diabetes, should take care to promptly self-isolate to prevent household transmission.

Since 1951, the Epidemic Intelligence Service (EIS) of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has trained physicians, nurses, scientists, veterinarians, and other allied health professionals in applied epidemiology. To understand the program’s effect on graduates’ leadership outcomes, we examined the EIS alumni representation in five select leadership positions. These positions were staffed by 353 individuals, of which 185 (52%) were EIS alumni. Among 12 CDC directors, four (33%) were EIS alumni. EIS alumni accounted for 29 (58%) of the 50 CDC center directors, 61 (35%) of the 175 state epidemiologists, 27 (56%) of the 48 Field Epidemiology Training Program resident advisors, and 70 (90%) of the 78 Career Epidemiology Field Officers. Of the 185 EIS alumni in leadership positions, 136 (74%) were physicians, 22 (12%) were scientists, 21 (11%) were veterinarians, 6 (3%) were nurses, and 94 (51%) were assigned to a state or local health department. Among the 61 EIS alumni who served as state epidemiologists, 40 (66%) of them were assigned to a state or local health department during EIS. Our evaluation suggests that epidemiology training programs can serve as a vital resource for the public health workforce, particularly given the capacity strains brought to light by the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has administered the Epidemic Intelligence Service (EIS) fellowship for over 50 years, with the goal of developing scientists and leaders in applied epidemiology. Our objective was to understand the extent to which CDC EIS alumni are present in select public health leadership roles. Methods We conducted an evaluation describing EIS alumni representation in five preselected leadership positions (CDC director [1953–2016]; CDC center director, state epidemiologist, Field Epidemiology Training Program [FETP] resident advisor, and Career Epidemiology Field Officer [CEFO] [2000–2016]). We developed a dataset using multiple sources to identify staff in selected positions. We then matched these data with an internal EIS alumni dataset. Results Selected positions were staffed by 353 persons, of which 185 (52%) were EIS alumni; 10 persons served in >1 leadership position, of which 6 were EIS alumni. Among 12 CDC directors, four (33%) were EIS alumni; collectively these alumni led CDC for approximately 25 years. EIS alumni accounted for 29 (58%) of 50 CDC center directors, 61 (35%) of 175 state epidemiologists, 27 (56%) of 48 Field Epidemiology Training Program resident advisors, and 70 (90%) of 78 Career Epidemiology Field Officers. Of 185 EIS alumni in leadership positions, 136 (74%) were physicians, 22 (12%) were scientists, 21 (11%) were veterinarians, 6 (3%) were nurses; 94 (51%) were assigned to a state or local health department. Among 61 EIS alumni who served as state epidemiologists, 40 (66%) were assigned to a state or local health department during EIS. Conclusions EIS alumni accounted for between approximately one-third (CDC directors and state epidemiologists) and 90% (CEFOs) of people serving in essential leadership positions at multiple levels.

SARS-CoV-2 transmission from contaminated surfaces, or fomites, has been a concern during the COVID-19 pandemic. Households have been important sites of transmission throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, but there is limited information on SARS-CoV-2 contamination of surfaces in these settings. We describe environmental detection of SARS-CoV-2 in households of persons with COVID-19 to better characterize the potential risks of fomite transmission. Ten households with ≥1 person with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and with ≥2 members total were enrolled in Utah, U.S.A. Nasopharyngeal and anterior nasal swabs were collected from members and tested for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 by RT-PCR. Fifteen surfaces were sampled in each household and tested for presence and viability of SARS-CoV-2. SARS-CoV-2 RNA was detected in 23 (15%) of 150 environmental swab samples, most frequently on nightstands (4/6, 67%), pillows (4/23, 17%), and light switches (3/21, 14%). Viable SARS-CoV-2 was cultured from one sample. All households with SARS-CoV-2-positive surfaces had ≥1 person who first tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 ≤ 6 days prior to environmental sampling. SARS-CoV-2 surface contamination occurred early in the course of infection when respiratory transmission is most likely, notably on surfaces in close, prolonged contact with persons with COVID-19. While fomite transmission might be possible, risk is low.

During early August 2020, county-level incidence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) generally decreased across the United States, compared with incidence earlier in the summer (1); however, among young adults aged 18-22 years, incidence increased (2). Increases in incidence among adults aged ≥60 years, who might be more susceptible to severe COVID-19-related illness, have followed increases in younger adults (aged 20-39 years) by an average of 8.7 days (3). Institutions of higher education (colleges and universities) have been identified as settings where incidence among young adults increased during August (4,5). Understanding the extent to which these settings have affected county-level COVID-19 incidence can inform ongoing college and university operations and future planning. To evaluate the effect of large colleges or universities and school instructional format* (remote or in-person) on COVID-19 incidence, start dates and instructional formats for the fall 2020 semester were identified for all not-for-profit large U.S. colleges and universities (≥20,000 total enrolled students). Among counties with large colleges and universities (university counties) included in the analysis, remote-instruction university counties (22) experienced a 17.9% decline in mean COVID-19 incidence during the 21 days before through 21 days after the start of classes (from 17.9 to 14.7 cases per 100,000), and in-person instruction university counties (79) experienced a 56.2% increase in COVID-19 incidence, from 15.3 to 23.9 cases per 100,000. Counties without large colleges and universities (nonuniversity counties) (3,009) experienced a 5.9% decline in COVID-19 incidence, from 15.3 to 14.4 cases per 100,000. Similar findings were observed for percentage of positive test results and hotspot status (i.e., increasing among in-person-instruction university counties). In-person instruction at colleges and universities was associated with increased county-level COVID-19 incidence and percentage test positivity. Implementation of increased mitigation efforts at colleges and universities could minimize on-campus COVID-19 transmission.

Poverty, crowded housing, and other community attributes associated with social vulnerability increase a community's risk for adverse health outcomes during and following a public health event (1). CDC uses standard criteria to identify U.S. counties with rapidly increasing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) incidence (hotspot counties) to support health departments in coordinating public health responses (2). County-level data on COVID-19 cases during June 1-July 25, 2020 and from the 2018 CDC social vulnerability index (SVI) were analyzed to examine associations between social vulnerability and hotspot detection and to describe incidence after hotspot detection. Areas with greater social vulnerabilities, particularly those related to higher representation of racial and ethnic minority residents (risk ratio [RR] = 5.3; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 4.4-6.4), density of housing units per structure (RR = 3.1; 95% CI = 2.7-3.6), and crowded housing units (i.e., more persons than rooms) (RR = 2.0; 95% CI = 1.8-2.3), were more likely to become hotspots, especially in less urban areas. Among hotspot counties, those with greater social vulnerability had higher COVID-19 incidence during the 14 days after detection (212-234 cases per 100,000 persons for highest SVI quartile versus 35-131 cases per 100,000 persons for other quartiles). Focused public health action at the federal, state, and local levels is needed not only to prevent communities with greater social vulnerability from becoming hotspots but also to decrease persistently high incidence among hotspot counties that are socially vulnerable.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Limited data exist on severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in children. We described infection rates and symptom profiles among pediatric household contacts of individuals with coronavirus disease 2019. METHODS: We enrolled individuals with coronavirus disease 2019 and their household contacts, assessed daily symptoms prospectively for 14 days, and obtained specimens for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction and serology testing. Among pediatric contacts ( RESULTS: Among 58 households, 188 contacts were enrolled (120 adults; 68 children). Secondary infection rates for adults (30%) and children (28%) were similar. Among households with potential for transmission from children, child-to-adult transmission may have occurred in 2 of 10 (20%), and child-to-child transmission may have occurred in 1 of 6 (17%). Pediatric case patients most commonly reported headache (79%), sore throat (68%), and rhinorrhea (68%); symptoms had low positive predictive values, except measured fever (100%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 44% to 100%). Compared with symptomatic adults, children were less likely to report cough (odds ratio [OR]: 0.15; 95% CI: 0.04 to 0.57), loss of taste (OR: 0.21; 95% CI: 0.06 to 0.74), and loss of smell (OR: 0.29; 95% CI: 0.09 to 0.96) and more likely to report sore throat (OR: 3.4; 95% CI: 1.04 to 11.18). CONCLUSIONS: Children and adults had similar secondary infection rates, but children generally had less frequent and severe symptoms. In two states early in the pandemic, we observed possible transmission from children in approximately one-fifth of households with potential to observe such transmission patterns.

Background Improved understanding of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) spectrum of disease is essential for clinical and public health interventions. There are limited data on mild or asymptomatic infections, but recognition of these individuals is key as they contribute to viral transmission. We describe the symptom profiles from individuals with mild or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods From 22 March to 22 April 2020 in Wisconsin and Utah, we enrolled and prospectively observed 198 household contacts exposed to SARS-CoV-2. We collected and tested nasopharyngeal specimens by real-time reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction (rRT-PCR) 2 or more times during a 14-day period. Contacts completed daily symptom diaries. We characterized symptom profiles on the date of first positive rRT-PCR test and described progression of symptoms over time. Results We identified 47 contacts, median age 24 (3–75) years, with detectable SARS-CoV-2 by rRT-PCR. The most commonly reported symptoms on the day of first positive rRT-PCR test were upper respiratory (n = 32 [68%]) and neurologic (n = 30 [64%]); fever was not commonly reported (n = 9 [19%]). Eight (17%) individuals were asymptomatic at the date of first positive rRT-PCR collection; 2 (4%) had preceding symptoms that resolved and 6 (13%) subsequently developed symptoms. Children less frequently reported lower respiratory symptoms (21%, 60%, and 69% for Conclusions Household contacts with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection reported mild symptoms. When assessed at a single timepoint, several contacts appeared to have asymptomatic infection; however, over time all developed symptoms. These findings are important to inform infection control, contact tracing, and community mitigation strategies.

Tuberculosis (TB) is the leading cause of death for persons living with HIV (PLHIV). TB preventive therapy (TPT) works synergistically with, and independently of, antiretroviral therapy (ART) to reduce TB morbidity, mortality and incidence among PLHIV. However, although TPT is a crucial and cost-effective component of HIV care for adults and children, and has been strongly recommended as an international standard of care for over a decade, it has remained highly underutilized. If we are to end the global TB epidemic, we must address the significant reservoir of TB infection, especially in those, such as PLHIV, with highest risk of progression to TB disease. In order to do so, we must confront the pervasive perception that barriers to TPT scale-up are insurmountable in resource-limited settings. In this article, we review available evidence to address several commonly stated obstacles to TPT scale-up. These include the need for tuberculin skin testing, limited diagnostic capacity to reliably exclude TB disease, concerns about creating drug resistance, suboptimal patient adherence to therapy, inability to prevent and monitor for adverse events, a “one size fits all” option for TPT regimen and duration, and uncertainty about TPT use in children, adolescents, and pregnant women. We also discuss TPT delivery in the era of differentiated care for PLHIV, how to best tackle advanced planning for drug procurement and supply chain management, and how to create an enabling environment for TPT scale-up success.

Background Tuberculosis (TB) screening affords clinicians the opportunity to diagnose or exclude TB disease and initiate isoniazid preventive therapy (IPT) for people living with HIV (PLHIV). Methods We implemented an algorithm to diagnose or rule out TB among PLHIV in 11 HIV clinics in Thailand and Vietnam. We assessed algorithm yield and uptake of IPT and factors associated with TB disease among PLHIV. Results A total of 1448 PLHIV not yet on antiretroviral therapy (ART) were enrolled and screened for TB. Overall, 634 (44%) screened positive and 119 (8%) were diagnosed with TB; of these, 40% (48/119) were diagnosed by a positive culture following a negative sputum smear microscopy. In total, 55% of those eligible (263/477) started on IPT and of those, 75% (196/263) completed therapy. The prevalence of TB disease we observed in this study was 8.2% (8218 per 100,000 persons): 46 and 25 times the prevalence of TB in the general population in Thailand and Vietnam, respectively. Several factors were independently associated with TB disease including being underweight [aOR (95% CI): 2.3 (1.2 to 2.6)] and using injection drugs [aOR (95% CI): 2.9 (1.3 to 6.3)]. Conclusions The high yield of TB disease diagnosed among PLHIV screened with the algorithm, and higher burden among PLHIV who inject drugs, underscores the need for innovative, tailored approaches to TB screening and prevention. As countries adopt test-and-start for antiretroviral therapy, TB screening, sensitive TB diagnostics, and IPT should be included in differentiated-care models for HIV to improve diagnosis and prevention of TB among PLHIV.

Treatment of people living with HIV (PLHIV) with latent tuberculosis (TB) infection using isoniazid preventive therapy (IPT) can reduce the risk of TB disease, however, the scale-up of IPT among PLHIV in Thailand and worldwide has been slow. To hasten the implementation of IPT in Thailand, we developed IPT implementation training curricula and tools for health care providers and implemented IPT services in seven large government hospitals. Of the 659 PLHIV enrolled, 272 (41.3%) reported symptoms of TB and 39 (14.3% of those with TB symptoms) were diagnosed with TB. A total of 346 (52.4%) participants were eligible for IPT; 318 (91.9%) of these participants opted to have a tuberculin skin test (TST) and 52 (16.3% of those who had a TST) had a positive TST result. Among the 52 participants with a positive TST, 46 (88.5%) initiated and 39 (75.0%) completed 9 months of IPT: physicians instructed three participants to stop IPT, two participants were lost to follow-up, one chose to stop therapy, and one developed TB. IPT can be implemented among PLHIV in Thailand and could reduce the burden of TB in the country.

Ethical principles obligate researchers to maximize study participants' comprehension during the informed consent process for clinical trials. A pilot evaluation of the consent process was conducted during an international clinical trial of treatment for pulmonary tuberculosis to assess the feasibility of conducting an evaluation in a larger population and to guide these future efforts.Study staff administered an informed consent assessment tool (ICAT) to a convenience sample of trial participants, measuring comprehension of consent components as derived from the Common Rule and FDA Title 21 Part 50, and satisfaction with the process. Participating site staff completed a consent process questionnaire about consent practices at their respective sites and provided improvement recommendations. ICAT scores and corresponding practices were compared where both were completed.ICATs (Participants achieved high levels (≥80%) of comprehension and satisfaction with their current consent processes. Higher ICAT scores at one site suggest an additional evaluation may identify approaches to improve comprehension and satisfaction in future trials. Through this pilot evaluation, complexities and challenges were identified in obtaining consent in a large, international multicenter trial and provided insights for a more robust assessment of the consent process in future trials.

Despite advances in prevention, diagnosis and treatment of tuberculosis and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), tuberculosis remains the leading cause of death and illness among people living with HIV. In 2015, an estimated 1.2 million of the people who developed tuberculosis disease worldwide were HIV positive, and tuberculosis was the direct cause of at least one third of HIV-related deaths. (1) The 2015 "Treat All" strategy requires that everyone with HIV is offered antiretroviral therapy (ART) as soon as they are diagnosed. By treating HIV infections earlier, this strategy should mitigate the HIV-associated tuberculosis epidemic, but it alone is not sufficient to eliminate preventable tuberculosis suffering and deaths among people living with HIV. (2) The 2016 World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines recommend differentiated HIV service delivery, which is intended to facilitate the "Treat All" strategy by tailoring services to the differing needs of individuals. (3) As HIV programmes adopt these WHO guidelines, tuberculosis also needs to be addressed. (3) Compared to the general population, people living with HIV have a significantly higher risk of tuberculosis even if they are stable on treatment and have high CD4+ T-lymphocyte counts. (4) Therefore, WHO recommends that all people living with HIV are screened for tuberculosis symptoms (cough of any duration, weight loss, fever or night sweats) at every patient encounter. (3) One of the implications of differentiated care is that the intervals between clinic visits and/or antiretroviral pick-ups from pharmacies may be extended to three or six months for people who are stable on ART. However, routine tuberculosis screening is still needed regularly, followed by appropriate evaluation, accurate diagnosis and treatment for either tuberculosis disease or latent infection. (3) Patients should also be able to receive tuberculosis preventive therapy at the same time that they pick-up their antiretroviral medications. (5-7) As part of differentiated care, community health workers, ART clubs and other models of community service delivery are increasingly being used by HIV-treatment programmes. In these models, participants could be trained to screen for symptoms of tuberculosis and other opportunistic infections, refer people for further evaluation and dispense tuberculosis preventive therapy. This approach has been piloted in several sub-Saharan African settings. (8-12) In addition, improving participants' understanding of tuberculosis will help them to recognize symptoms in themselves and family members and advocate for their own care. …

Background The World Health Organization (WHO) 2010 guidelines for intensified tuberculosis (TB) case finding (ICF) among people living with HIV (PLHIV) includes a recommendation that PLHIV receive routine TB screening. Since 2005, the Rwandan Ministry of Health has been using a five-question screening tool. Our study objective was to assess the operating characteristics of the tool designed to identify PLHIV with presumptive TB as measured against a composite reference standard, including bacteriologically confirmed TB. Methods In a cross-sectional study, the TB screening tool was routinely administered at enrolment in outpatient HIV care and treatment services at seven public health facilities. From March to September 2011, study enrollees were examined for TB disease irrespective of TB screening outcome. The examination consisted of a chest radiograph (CXR), three sputum smears (SS), sputum culture (SC) and polymerase chain reaction line-probe assay (Hain test). PLHIV were classified as having “laboratory-confirmed TB” with positive results on SS for acid-fast bacilli, SC on Lowenstein-Jensen medium, or a Hain test. Results Overall, 1,767 patients were enrolled and screened of which; 1,017 (57.6%) were female, median age was 33 (IQR, 27–41), and median CD4+ cell count was 385 (IQR, 229–563) cells/mm3. Of the patients screened, 138 (7.8%) were diagnosed with TB of which; 125 (90.5%) were laboratory-confirmed pulmonary TB. Of 404 (22.9%) patients who screened positive and 1,363 (77.1%) who screened negative, 79 (19.5%) and 59 (4.3%), respectively, were diagnosed with TB. For laboratory-confirmed TB, the tool had a sensitivity of 54.4% (95% CI 45.3–63.3), specificity of 79.5% (95% CI 77.5–81.5), PPV of 16.8% and NPV of 95.8%. Conclusion TB prevalence among PLHIV newly enrolling into HIV care and treatment was 65 times greater than the overall population prevalence. However, the performance of the tool was poorer than the predicted performance of the WHO recommended TB screening questions.

Background The public's ability and willingness to adopt community mitigation efforts during a pandemic are debated in the literature. Purpose Awareness and adoption of community mitigation efforts in Mexico during the 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1) (pH1N1) outbreak were measured to evaluate if the population received, understood, and acted on public health messages. Methods A cross-sectional representative household survey in Mexico City; San Luis Potosi (high case ratio); and Queretaro (low case ratio) was conducted in May and June 2009. Accounting for the complex survey design, percentages and 95% CI for answers to all questions were generated and compared based on living inside or outside Mexico City, high versus low prevalence of infection in the community, and perceived severity and knowledge of the virus. Results Greater than 90% of respondents received community mitigation messages and adopted one or more community mitigation efforts. There were few differences among cities. Respondents reported high cost of masks, soaps, and gels as barriers to community mitigation-effort adoption. Nearly one fifth of respondents, disproportionally from the lower socioeconomic tertile, found some messages confusing. Half of all households reported a negative economic impact resulting from the outbreak. Conclusions Mexico's community mitigation campaign reached the majority of the population in three surveyed cities. Confusion regarding messages and economic barriers to community mitigation-effort adoption were sometimes reported.

The collision of the tuberculosis (TB) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) epidemics has been described as a ‘syndemic’ due to the synergistic impact on the burden of both diseases. This paper explains the urgent need for practitioners and policy makers to address a third epidemic that exacerbates TB, HIV and TB-HIV. Tobacco use is the leading cause of preventable death worldwide. Smoking is more prevalent among persons diagnosed with TB or HIV. Smoking is associated with tuberculous infection, TB disease and poorer anti-tuberculosis treatment outcomes. It is also associated with an increased risk of smoking-related diseases among people living with HIV, and smoking may also inhibit the effectiveness of life-saving ART. In this paper, we propose integrating into TB and HIV programmes evidence-based strategies from the ‘MPO-WER’ package recommended by the World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Specific actions that can be readily incorporated into current practice are recommended to improve TB and HIV outcomes and care, and reduce the unnecessary burden of death and disease due to smoking.

Objective To assess scale-up of recommended tuberculosis (TB)/HIV activities in Guyana and to identify specific strategies for further expansion. Methods Medical records and clinic registers were reviewed at nine TB clinics and 10 HIV clinics. At TB clinics, data were collected on HIV testing and antiretroviral therapy (ART) for patients with TB/HIV; at HIV clinics, data were collected on intensified case finding (ICF), tuberculin skin test (TST) results, and provision of isoniazid preventive therapy (IPT). Results At TB clinics, among 461 patients newly diagnosed with TB, 419 (90.9%) had a known HIV status and 121 (28.9%) were HIV-infected. Among the 63 patients with TB/HIV, 33 (52.4%) received ART. Among the 45 patients with TB/HIV for whom dates of HIV diagnosis were available, 38 (84.4%) individuals knew their HIV status prior to TB diagnosis. At HIV clinics, among 127 patients eligible to receive a TST, 87 (68.5%) received a TST, 66 (75.9%) had a TST result, seven (10.6%) had a newly positive result, two had a previously positive result, and six of nine patients with positive results (66.7%) received IPT. ICF could not be assessed because of incomplete or discrepant documentation. Conclusions An in-depth evaluation of TB/HIV activities successfully identified areas of success and remaining challenges. At TB clinics, HIV testing rates are high; further scale-up of ART for persons with TB/HIV is needed. At HIV clinics, use of TST to focus IPT is a feasible and efficient strategy; improving rates of annual TST screening will allow for further expansion of IPT.

Objectives. We investigated a cluster of tuberculosis (TB) cases among persons using methamphetamines in Snohomish County, Washington, to determine the extent of the outbreak, examine whether methamphetamine use contributed to TB transmission, and implement strategies to prevent further infections. Methods. We screened contacts to find and treat persons with TB disease or infection. We then formed a multidisciplinary team to engage substance abuse services partners and implement outreach strategies including novel methods for finding contacts and a system of incentives and enablers to promote finding, screening, and treating patients with TB and their infected contacts. Results. We diagnosed and completed treatment with 10 persons with TB disease. Eight of 9 adult patients and 67% of their adult contacts reported using methamphetamines. Of the 372 contacts, 319 (85.8%) were screened, 80 (25.1%) were infected, 71 (88.8%) started treatment for latent infection, and 57 (80.3%) completed treatment for latent infection. Conclusions. Collaborative approaches integrating TB control, outreach, incentives, and enablers resulted in high rates of treatment adherence and completion among patients and infected contacts. TB control programs should collaborate with substance abuse programs to address addiction, overcome substance abuse–related barriers to treatment, treat TB, and prevent ongoing transmission.

Background Tuberculosis (TB) control efforts are often ineffective in controlling TB among patients who use illicit drugs or abuse alcohol (substance abuse). This study examined the prevalence of substance abuse among TB cases reported in the United States and assessed the relation between substance abuse and indicators of TB transmission. Methods A cross-sectional analysis was performed of data on US TB cases in patients 15 years or older reported from 1997 through 2006. Analyses included number and proportion of patients with TB characterized by substance abuse and associations between substance abuse, sputum smear status, treatment failure, and inclusion in a county-level genotype cluster. Results Of 153 268 patients with TB, 28 650 (18.7%) reported substance abuse, including 22 293 of 76 816 US-born patients (29.0%). Multivariate analysis showed that, among patients negative for human immunodeficiency virus, odds of sputum smear–positive disease were 1.8 (99% confidence interval [CI], 1.7-1.9) times greater among those who reported substance abuse; this association was weaker among patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection (odds ratio [OR], 1.2; 99% CI, 1.1-1.4). Among female patients, odds of treatment failure were 2.4 (99% CI, 1.9-3.0) times greater among those who reported substance abuse. The association was weaker among male patients (OR, 1.5; 99% CI, 1.3-1.7). Patients who abused substances were more likely to be involved in a county-level genotype cluster (US-born: OR, 2.3; 99% CI, 2.0-2.7; foreign-born: 1.5; 1.2-2.0). Conclusions Substance abuse is the most commonly reported behavioral risk factor among patients with TB in the United States. Patients who abuse substances are more contagious (eg, smear positive) and remain contagious longer because treatment failure presumably extends periods of infectiousness. Increased transmission is consistent with our finding that patients who abuse substances were more likely to be involved in a localized genotype cluster, which can represent recent transmission.