Lyme disease (LD) is the most common tick-borne disease in the United States and in Europe. The aim of this study was to examine knowledge, perceived risk, feelings of anxiety, and behavioral responses of the general public in relation to tick bites and LD in the Netherlands.

Vaccination uptake has decreased globally in recent years, with a subsequent rise of vaccine-preventable diseases. Travellers, immunocompromised patients (ICP), and healthcare workers (HCW) are groups at increased risk for (severe) infectious diseases due to their behaviour, health, or occupation, respectively. While targeted vaccination guidelines are available, vaccination uptake seems low. In this review, we give a comprehensive overview of determinants—based on the integrated change model—predicting vaccination uptake in these groups. In travellers, low perceived risk of infection and low awareness of vaccination recommendations contributed to low uptake. Additionally, ICP were often unaware of the recommended vaccinations. A physician’s recommendation is strongly correlated with higher uptake. Furthermore, ICP appeared to be mainly concerned about the risks of vaccination and fear of deterioration of their underlying disease. For HCW, perceived risk of (the severity of) infection for themselves and for their patients together with perceived benefits of vaccination contribute most to their vaccination behaviour. As the determinants that affect uptake are numerous and diverse, we argue that future studies and interventions should be based on multifactorial health behaviour models, especially for travellers and ICP as only a limited number of such studies is available yet.

Understanding public opinion and attitudes regarding vaccination is crucial for successful outbreak management and effective communication at the European level. We explored national differences by conducting focus group discussions in The Netherlands, Poland and Sweden. Discussions were structured using concepts from behavioural models. Thematic analysis revealed that participants would base their vaccination decision on trade-offs between perceived benefits and barriers of the vaccine also taking into account the seriousness of the new outbreak. Except for those having chronic diseases, participants expected a low infection risk, resulting in a low willingness to get vaccinated. Information about the health status of cases was considered important since this might change perceived susceptibility. Participants displayed concerns about vaccine safety due to the limited available time to produce and test vaccines in the acute situation of a new pandemic. Swedish participants mentioned their tendency of doing the right thing and following the rules, as well as to get vaccinated because of solidarity with other citizens and social influences. This appeared much less prominent for the Dutch and Polish participants. However, Swedish participants indicated that their negative experiences during the Influenza A/H1N1 2009 pandemic decreases their acceptance of future vaccinations. Polish participants lacked trust in their national (public) health system and government, and were therefore sceptical about the availability and quality of vaccines in Poland. Although participants overall expressed similar considerations, important differences between countries stand out, such as previous vaccination experiences, the degree of adherence to social norms, and the degree of trust in health authorities.

Background: An outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in a nursing home in the Netherlands, following an on-site church service held on 8 March 2020, triggered an investigation to unravel sources and chain(s) of transmission. Methods: Epidemiological data were collected from registries and through a questionnaire among church attendees. Symptomatic residents and healthcare workers (HCWs) were tested for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction and subjected to whole genome sequencing (WGS). Sequences from a selection of people from the same area were included as community reference. Results: After the church service, 30 of 39 attendees (77%) developed symptoms; 14 (11 residents and 3 nonresidents) were tested and were positive for COVID-19. In the following 5 weeks, 62 of 300 residents (21%) and 30 of 640 HCWs (5%) tested positive for COVID-19; 21 of 62 residents (34%) died. The outbreak was controlled through a cascade of measures. WGS of samples from residents and HCWs identified a diversity of sequence types, grouped into 8 clusters. Seven resident church attendees all were infected with distinct viruses, 4 of which belonged to 2 larger clusters in the nursing home. Conclusions: Although initial investigation suggested the church service as the source of the outbreak, detailed analysis showed a more complex picture, most consistent with widespread regional circulation of the virus in the weeks before the outbreak, and multiple introductions into the nursing home before the visitor ban. The findings underscore the importance of careful outbreak investigations to understand SARS-CoV-2 transmission to develop evidence-based mitigation measures.

Objective: To assess the effect of a multimodal intervention on hand hygiene compliance (HHC) in nursing homes.Design, setting, and participants: HHC was evaluated using direct, unobtrusive observation in a cluster randomized controlled trial at publicly funded nursing homes in the Netherlands. In total, 103 nursing home organizations were invited to participate; 18 organizations comprising 33 nursing homes (n = 66 nursing home units) participated in the study. Nursing homes were randomized into a control group (no intervention, n = 30) or an intervention group (multimodal intervention, n = 36). The primary outcome measure was HHC of nurses. HHC was appraised at baseline and at 4, 7, and 12 months after baseline. Observers and nurses were blinded.Intervention: Audits regarding hand hygiene (HH) materials and personal hygiene rules, 3 live lessons, an e-learning program, posters, and a photo contest. We used a new method to teach the nurses the WHO-defined 5 moments of HH: Room In, Room Out, Before Clean, and After Dirty.Results: HHC increased in both arms. The increase after 12 months was larger for units in the intervention arm (from 12% to 36%) than for control units (from 13% to 21%) (odds ratio [OR], 2.10; confidence interval [CI], 1.35–3.28). The intervention arm exhibited a statistically significant increase in HHC at 4 of the 5 WHO-defined HH moments. At follow-up, HHC in the intervention arm remained statistically significantly higher (OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.59–2.34) for indications after an activity (from 37% to 39%) than for indications before an activity (from 14% to 27%).Conclusions: The HANDSOME intervention is successful in improving HHC in nursing homes.

Correctly identifying the determinants of generalized HIV epidemics is crucial to bringing down ongoing high HIV incidence in these countries. High rates of migration are believed to be an important determinant of HIV prevalence. This study has two aims. Firstly, it evaluates the ecological association between levels of internal and international migration and national peak HIV prevalence using thirteen variables from a variety of sources to capture various aspects of internal and international migration intensity. Secondly, it examines the relationship between circular migration and HIV at an individual and population-level in South Africa. Linear regression was used to analyze the association between the various measures of migration intensity and peak national HIV prevalence for 141 countries and HIV prevalence by province and ethnic group in South Africa. No evidence of a positive ecological association between national migration intensity and HIV prevalence was found. This remained the case when the analyses were limited to the countries of sub-Saharan Africa. On the whole, countries with generalized HIV epidemics had lower rates of internal and external migration. Likewise, no association was found between migration and HIV positivity at an individual or group-level in South Africa. These results do not support the thesis that migration measured at the country level plays a significant role in determining peak HIV prevalence.