» Articles » PMID: 35681199

National Influenza Surveillance Systems in Five European Countries: a Qualitative Comparative Framework Based on WHO Guidance

Abstract

Background: Influenza surveillance systems vary widely between countries and there is no framework to evaluate national surveillance systems in terms of data generation and dissemination. This study aimed to develop and test a comparative framework for European influenza surveillance.

Methods: Surveillance systems were evaluated qualitatively in five European countries (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom) by a panel of influenza experts and researchers from each country. Seven surveillance sub-systems were defined: non-medically attended community surveillance, virological surveillance, community surveillance, outbreak surveillance, primary care surveillance, hospital surveillance, mortality surveillance). These covered a total of 19 comparable outcomes of increasing severity, ranging from non-medically attended cases to deaths, which were evaluated using 5 comparison criteria based on WHO guidance (granularity, timing, representativeness, sampling strategy, communication) to produce a framework to compare the five countries.

Results: France and the United Kingdom showed the widest range of surveillance sub-systems, particularly for hospital surveillance, followed by Germany, Spain, and Italy. In all countries, virological, primary care and hospital surveillance were well developed, but non-medically attended events, influenza cases in the community, outbreaks in closed settings and mortality estimates were not consistently reported or published. The framework also allowed the comparison of variations in data granularity, timing, representativeness, sampling strategy, and communication between countries. For data granularity, breakdown per risk condition were available in France and Spain, but not in the United Kingdom, Germany and Italy. For data communication, there were disparities in the timeliness and accessibility of surveillance data.

Conclusions: This new framework can be used to compare influenza surveillance systems qualitatively between countries to allow the identification of structural differences as well as to evaluate adherence to WHO guidance. The framework may be adapted for other infectious respiratory diseases.

Citing Articles

A comparative study of influenza surveillance systems and administrative data in England during the 2022-2023 season.

Mellor J, Christie R, Guilder J, Paton R, Elgohari S, Watson C PLOS Glob Public Health. 2024; 4(9):e0003627.

PMID: 39302991 PMC: 11414916. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0003627.


Public health and economic benefits of seasonal influenza vaccination in risk groups in France, Italy, Spain and the UK: state of play and perspectives.

de Fougerolles T, Baissas T, Perquier G, Vitoux O, Crepey P, Bartelt-Hofer J BMC Public Health. 2024; 24(1):1222.

PMID: 38702667 PMC: 11067100. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-024-18694-5.


Postpandemic Sentinel Surveillance of Respiratory Diseases in the Context of the World Health Organization Mosaic Framework: Protocol for a Development and Evaluation Study Involving the English Primary Care Network 2023-2024.

Gu X, Watson C, Agrawal U, Whitaker H, Elson W, Anand S JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2024; 10:e52047.

PMID: 38569175 PMC: 11024753. DOI: 10.2196/52047.


Protocol for establishing a model for integrated influenza surveillance in Tamil Nadu, India.

Abdulkader R, Potdar V, Mohd G, Chadwick J, Raju M, Devika S Front Public Health. 2023; 11:1236690.

PMID: 37663861 PMC: 10469860. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1236690.


Detecting early signals of COVID-19 outbreaks in 2020 in small areas by monitoring healthcare utilisation databases: first lessons learned from the Italian Alert_CoV project.

Merlo I, Crea M, Berta P, Ieva F, Carle F, Rea F Euro Surveill. 2023; 28(1).

PMID: 36695448 PMC: 9817206. DOI: 10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2023.28.1.2200366.


References
1.
El Guerche-Seblain C, de Fougerolles T, Sampson K, Jennings L, Van Buynder P, Shu Y . Comparison of influenza surveillance systems in Australia, China, Malaysia and expert recommendations for influenza control. BMC Public Health. 2021; 21(1):1750. PMC: 8466892. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-021-11765-x. View

2.
Wilkinson M, Dumontier M, Aalbersberg I, Appleton G, Axton M, Baak A . The FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Sci Data. 2016; 3:160018. PMC: 4792175. DOI: 10.1038/sdata.2016.18. View

3.
Guerrisi C, Turbelin C, Blanchon T, Hanslik T, Bonmarin I, Levy-Bruhl D . Participatory Syndromic Surveillance of Influenza in Europe. J Infect Dis. 2017; 214(suppl_4):S386-S392. DOI: 10.1093/infdis/jiw280. View

4.
Sanicas M, Forleo E, Pozzi G, Diop D . A review of the surveillance systems of influenza in selected countries in the tropical region. Pan Afr Med J. 2015; 19:121. PMC: 4341259. DOI: 10.11604/pamj.2014.19.121.4280. View

5.
Nielsen J, Krause T, Molbak K . Influenza-associated mortality determined from all-cause mortality, Denmark 2010/11-2016/17: The FluMOMO model. Influenza Other Respir Viruses. 2018; 12(5):591-604. PMC: 6086850. DOI: 10.1111/irv.12564. View