4.6 Article

Age-Dependent Patterns of Infection and Severity Explaining the Low Impact of 2009 Influenza A (H1N1): Evidence From Serial Serologic Surveys in the Netherlands

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 174, Issue 11, Pages 1307-1315

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwr245

Keywords

disease outbreaks; disease transmission, infectious; influenza A virus, H1N1 subtype; influenza, human; serology

Funding

  1. Dutch Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport
  2. European Union

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Despite considerable research efforts in specific subpopulations, reliable estimates of the infection attack rates and severity of 2009 influenza A (H1N1) in the general population remain scarce. Such estimates are essential to the tailoring of future control strategies. Therefore, 2 serial population-based serologic surveys were conducted, before and after the 2009 influenza A (H1N1) epidemic, in the Netherlands. Random age-stratified samples were obtained using a 2-stage cluster design. Participants donated blood and completed a questionnaire. Data on sentinel general practitioner-attended influenza-like illness and nationwide hospitalization and mortality were used to assess the severity of infection. The estimated infection attack rates were low in the general population (7.6%, 95% confidence interval: 3.6, 11) but high in children aged 5-19 years (35%, 95% confidence interval: 25, 45). The estimated hospitalization and mortality rates per infection increased significantly with age (5-19 years: 0.042% and 0.00094%, respectively; 20-39 years: 0.12% and 0.0025%; 40-59 years: 0.68% and 0.032%; 60-75 years: >0.81% and >0.068%). The high infection attack rate in children and the very low attack rate in older adults, together with the low severity of illness per infection in children but substantial severity in older adults, produced an epidemic with a low overall impact.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available