Search

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the primary care experiences of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive individuals across Europe.Methods: An anonymous self-administered questionnaire study was carried out between August 1996 and August 1997. A total of 15 HIV/AIDS treatment centres and 14 HIV support organizations in 11 European countries participated in the distribution of questionnaires. Overall, 1366 completed questionnaires were included in the analysis from a total of 2751 distributed (50% response rate). The majority of respondents were homosexual men (53.6%), and 54.2% had AIDS or symptomatic HIV disease. The main outcome measures were use of GP services in the preceding 6 months, GP involvement in HIV care provision, satisfaction with current service provision and reasons for non-involvement of the primary care services.Results: Most patients (64.8%) had visited their GP at least once in the preceding 6 months, but 53.9% of respondents reported that their GP was not involved in their HIV care. Of these patients, 53.4% would like their GP to be involved. Patients from central European countries were more likely to have seen their GP than their counterparts from northern and southern countries (P < 0.005), and were less worried that the GP would not have enough knowledge about HIV (P = 0.002) or would not be sympathetic (P = 0.052).Conclusions: There are clear differences in GP utilization by HIV-positive individuals across Europe, reflecting in part local service provision but primarily patients' attitudes and beliefs. Strategies to promote the involvement of primary health care services need to address patients' core beliefs, if these are to be changed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

WHO works, on a daily basis, with countries globally to detect, prepare for and respond to acute public health events. A vital component of a health response is the dissemination of accurate, reliable and authoritative information. The Disease Outbreak News (DON) reports are a key mechanism through which WHO communicates on acute public health events to the public. The decision to produce a DON report is taken on a case-by-case basis after evaluating key criteria, and the subsequent process of producing a DON report is highly standardised to ensure the robustness of information. DON reports have been published since 1996, and up to 2022 over 3000 reports have been published. Between 2018 and 2022, the most frequently published DON reports relate to Ebola virus disease, Middle East respiratory syndrome, yellow fever, polio and cholera. The DON web page is highly visited with a readership of over 2.6 million visits per year, on average. The DON report structure has evolved over time, from a single paragraph in 1996 to a detailed report with seven sections currently. WHO regularly reviews the DON report process and structure for improvements. In the last 25 years, DON reports have played a unique role in rapidly disseminating information on acute public health events to health actors and the public globally. They have become a key information source for the global public health response to the benefit of individuals and communities., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.)

The start of the cholera epidemic in Haiti quickly highlighted the necessity of the implementation of an Alert and Response (A&R) System to complement the existing national surveillance system. The national system had been able to detect and confirm the outbreak etiology but required external support to monitor the spread of cholera and coordinate response, because much of the information produced was insufficiently timely for real-time monitoring and directing of a rapid, targeted response. The A&R System was designed by the Pan American Health Organization/World Health Organization in collaboration with the Haiti Ministry of Health, and it was based on a network of partners, including any institution, structure, or individual that could identify, verify, and respond to alerts. The defined objectives were to (1) save lives through early detection and treatment of cases and (2) control the spread through early intervention at the community level. The operational structure could be broken down into three principle categories: (1) alert (early warning), (2) verification and assessment of the information, and (3) efficient and timely response in coordination with partners to avoid duplication. Information generated by the A&R System was analyzed and interpreted, and the qualitative information was critical in qualifying the epidemic and defining vulnerable areas, particularly because the national surveillance system reported incomplete data for more than one department. The A&R System detected a number of alerts unrelated to cholera and facilitated rapid access to that information. The sensitivity of the system and its ability to react quickly was shown in May of 2011, when an abnormal increase in alerts coming from several communes in the Sud-Est Department in epidemiological weeks (EWs) 17 and 18 were noted and disseminated network-wide and response activities were implemented. The national cholera surveillance system did not register the increase until EWs 21 and 22, and the information did not become available until EWs 23 and 24, when the peak of cases had already been reached. Although many of the partners reporting alerts during the peak of the cholera epidemic have since left Haiti, the A&R System has continued to function as an Early Warning (EWARN) System, and it continues to be developed with recent activities, such as the distribution of cell phones to enhance alert communication.

Following the appearance of influenza A/H5 virus infection in several wild and domestic bird species in the Republic of Azerbaijan in February 2006, two clusters of potential human avian influenza due to A/H5N1 (HAI) cases were detected and reported by the Ministry of Health (MoH) to the World Health Organization (WHO) Regional Office for Europe during the first two weeks of March 2006. On 15 March 2006, WHO led an international team, including infection control, clinical management, epidemiology, laboratory, and communications experts, to support the MoH in investigation and response activities. As a result of active surveillance, 22 individuals, including six deaths, were evaluated for HAI and associated risk infections in six districts. The investigations revealed eight cases with influenza A/H5N1 virus infection confirmed by a WHO Collaborating Centre for Influenza and one probable case for which samples were not available. The cases were in two unrelated clusters in Salyan (seven laboratory confirmed cases, including four deaths) and Tarter districts (one confirmed case and one probable case, both fatal). Close contact with and de-feathering of infected wild swans was considered to be the most plausible source of exposure to influenza A/H5N1 virus in the Salyan cluster, although difficulties in eliciting information were encountered during the investigation, because of the illegality of some of the activities that might have led to the exposures (hunting and trading in wild birds and their products). These cases constitute the first outbreak worldwide where wild birds were the most likely source of influenza A/H5N1 virus infection in humans. The rapid mobilisation of resources to contain the spread of influenza A/H5 in the two districts was achieved through collaboration between the MoH, WHO and its international partners. Control activities were supported by the establishment of a field laboratory with real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) capacity to detect influenza A/H5 virus. Daily door-to-door surveillance undertaken in the two affected districts made it unlikely that human cases of influenza A/H5N1 virus infection remained undetected.

The within-outbreak diversity of hepatitis E virus (HEV) was studied during the outbreak of hepatitis E that occurred in Sudan in 2004. Specimens were collected from internally displaced persons living in a Sudanese refugee camp and two camps implanted in Chad. A comparison of the sequences in the ORF2 region of 23 Sudanese isolates and five HEV samples from the two Chadian camps displayed a high similarity (>99.7%) to strains belonging to Genotype 1. But four isolates collected in one of the Chadian camps were close to Genotype 2. Circulation of divergent strains argues for possible multiple sources of infection., (Copyright (c) 2005 Wiley-Liss, inc.)