The systematic evaluation of the results of time-series studies of air pollution is challenged by differences in model specification and publication bias. We evaluated the associations of inhalable particulate matter (PM) with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 μm or less (PM₁₀) and fine PM with an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 μm or less (PM_2.5) with daily all-cause, cardiovascular, and respiratory mortality across multiple countries or regions. Daily data on mortality and air pollution were collected from 652 cities in 24 countries or regions. We used overdispersed generalized additive models with random-effects meta-analysis to investigate the associations. Two-pollutant models were fitted to test the robustness of the associations. Concentration–response curves from each city were pooled to allow global estimates to be derived. On average, an increase of 10 μg per cubic meter in the 2-day moving average of PM₁₀ concentration, which represents the average over the current and previous day, was associated with increases of 0.44% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39 to 0.50) in daily all-cause mortality, 0.36% (95% CI, 0.30 to 0.43) in daily cardiovascular mortality, and 0.47% (95% CI, 0.35 to 0.58) in daily respiratory mortality. The corresponding increases in daily mortality for the same change in PM_2.5 concentration were 0.68% (95% CI, 0.59 to 0.77), 0.55% (95% CI, 0.45 to 0.66), and 0.74% (95% CI, 0.53 to 0.95). These associations remained significant after adjustment for gaseous pollutants. Associations were stronger in locations with lower annual mean PM concentrations and higher annual mean temperatures. The pooled concentration–response curves showed a consistent increase in daily mortality with increasing PM concentration, with steeper slopes at lower PM concentrations. Our data show independent associations between short-term exposure to PM₁₀ and PM_2.5 and daily all-cause, cardiovascular, and respiratory mortality in more than 600 cities across the globe. These data reinforce the evidence of a link between mortality and PM concentration established in regional and local studies. (Funded by the National Natural Science Foundation of China and others.)

Please cite this paper as:Vegaet al.(2012) Influenza surveillance in Europe: establishing epidemic thresholds by the moving epidemic method. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses 7(4), 546–558.Background Timely influenza surveillance is important to monitor influenza epidemics.Objectives (i) To calculate the epidemic threshold for influenza‐like illness (ILI) and acute respiratory infections (ARI) in 19 countries, as well as the thresholds for different levels of intensity. (ii) To evaluate the performance of these thresholds.Methods The moving epidemic method (MEM) has been developed to determine the baseline influenza activity and an epidemic threshold. False alerts, detection lags and timeliness of the detection of epidemics were calculated. The performance was evaluated using a cross‐validation procedure.Results The overall sensitivity of the MEM threshold was 71·8% and the specificity was 95·5%. The median of the timeliness was 1 week (range: 0–4·5).Conclusions The method produced a robust and specific signal to detect influenza epidemics. The good balance between the sensitivity and specificity of the epidemic threshold to detect seasonal epidemics and avoid false alerts has advantages for public health purposes. This method may serve as standard to define the start of the annual influenza epidemic in countries in Europe.

A multicentre case-control study based on sentinel practitioner surveillance networks from seven European countries was undertaken to estimate the effectiveness of 2009–2010 pandemic and seasonal influenza vaccines against medically attended influenza-like illness (ILI) laboratory-confirmed as pandemic influenza A (H1N1) (pH1N1). Sentinel practitioners swabbed ILI patients using systematic sampling. We included in the study patients meeting the European ILI case definition with onset of symptoms >14 days after the start of national pandemic vaccination campaigns. We compared pH1N1 cases to influenza laboratory-negative controls. A valid vaccination corresponded to >14 days between receiving a dose of vaccine and symptom onset. We estimated pooled vaccine effectiveness (VE) as 1 minus the odds ratio with the study site as a fixed effect. Using logistic regression, we adjusted VE for potential confounding factors (age group, sex, month of onset, chronic diseases and related hospitalizations, smoking history, seasonal influenza vaccinations, practitioner visits in previous year). We conducted a complete case analysis excluding individuals with missing values and a multiple multivariate imputation to estimate missing values. The multivariate imputation (n = 2902) adjusted pandemic VE (PIVE) estimates were 71.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 45.6–85.5) overall; 78.4% (95% CI 54.4–89.8) in patients <65 years; and 72.9% (95% CI 39.8–87.8) in individuals without chronic disease. The complete case (n = 1,502) adjusted PIVE were 66.0% (95% CI 23.9–84.8), 71.3% (95% CI 29.1–88.4), and 70.2% (95% CI 19.4–89.0), respectively. The adjusted PIVE was 66.0% (95% CI −69.9 to 93.2) if vaccinated 8–14 days before ILI onset. The adjusted 2009–2010 seasonal influenza VE was 9.9% (95% CI −65.2 to 50.9). Our results suggest good protection of the pandemic monovalent vaccine against medically attended pH1N1 and no effect of the 2009–2010 seasonal influenza vaccine. However, the late availability of the pandemic vaccine and subsequent limited coverage with this vaccine hampered our ability to study vaccine benefits during the outbreak period. Future studies should include estimation of the effectiveness of the new trivalent vaccine in the upcoming 2010–2011 season, when vaccination will occur before the influenza season starts. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary

Since the 2008/9 influenza season, the I-MOVE multicentre case–control study measures influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) against medically-attended influenza-like-illness (ILI) laboratory confirmed as influenza. In 2011/12, European studies reported a decline in VE against influenza A(H3N2) within the season. Using combined I-MOVE data from 2010/11 to 2014/15 we studied the effects of time since vaccination on influenza type/subtype-specific VE. We modelled influenza type/subtype-specific VE by time since vaccination using a restricted cubic spline, controlling for potential confounders (age, sex, time of onset, chronic conditions). Over 10,000 ILI cases were included in each analysis of influenza A(H3N2), A(H1N1)pdm09 and B; with 4,759, 3,152 and 3,617 influenza positive cases respectively. VE against influenza A(H3N2) reached 50.6% (95% CI: 30.0–65.1) 38 days after vaccination, declined to 0% (95% CI: -18.1–15.2) from 111 days onwards. At day 54 VE against influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 reached 55.3% (95% CI: 37.9–67.9) and remained between this value and 50.3% (95% CI: 34.8–62.1) until season end. VE against influenza B declined from 70.7% (95% CI: 51.3–82.4) 44 days after vaccination to 21.4% (95% CI: -57.4–60.8) at season end. To assess if vaccination campaign strategies need revising more evidence on VE by time since vaccination is urgently needed.

Background: Dignity therapy is a brief psychotherapy developed for patients living with a life-limiting illness. Objective: To determine the influence of dignity therapy on depression and anxiety in inpatients with a terminal illness and experiencing a high level of distress in a palliative care unit. Methods: A nonblinded phase II randomized controlled trial of 80 patients who were randomly assigned to one of two groups: intervention group (dignity therapy+standard palliative care [SPC]) or control group (SPC alone). The main outcomes were depression and anxiety scores, as measured with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and assessed at baseline (T1), day 4 (T2), day 15 (T3), and day 30 (T4) of follow-up. This study is registered with www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN34354086 . Results: Of the final 80 participants, 41 were randomly assigned to SPC and 39 to dignity therapy. Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. Dignity therapy was associated with a decrease in depression scores (median, 95% confidence interval [CI]: −4.00, −6.00 to −2.00, p <0.0001; −4.00, −7.00 to −1.00, p =0.010; −5.00, −8.00 to −1.00, p =0.043, for T2, T3, and T4, respectively). Dignity therapy was similarly associated with a decrease in anxiety scores (median, 95% CI: −3.00, −5.00 to −1.00, p <0.0001; −4.00, −7.00 to −2.00, p =0.001; −4.00, −7.00 to −1.00, p =0.013, for T2, T3, and T4, respectively). Conclusion: Dignity therapy resulted in a beneficial effect on depression and anxiety symptoms in end-of-life care. The therapeutic benefit of dignity therapy was sustained over a 30-day period. Having established its efficacy, future trials of dignity therapy may now begin, comparing it with other psychotherapeutic approaches within the context of terminal illness.