METHODS: Three national influenza surveillance systems with different levels of development (Australia, China and Malaysia) were compared and their adherence to World Health Organization (WHO) guidance was evaluated using a structured framework previously tested in several European countries consisting of seven surveillance sub-systems, 19 comparable outcomes and five evaluation criteria. Based on the results, experts from the Asia-Pacific Alliance for the Control of Influenza (APACI) issued recommendations for the improvement of existing surveillance systems.
RESULTS: Australia demonstrated the broadest scope of influenza surveillance followed by China and Malaysia. In Australia, surveillance tools covered all sub-systems. In China, surveillance did not cover non-medically attended respiratory events, primary care consultations, and excess mortality modelling. In Malaysia, surveillance consisted of primary care and hospital sentinel schemes. There were disparities between the countries across the 5 evaluation criteria, particularly regarding data granularity from health authorities, information on data representativeness, and data communication, especially the absence of publicly available influenza epidemiological reports in Malaysia. This dual approach describing the scope of surveillance and evaluating the adherence to WHO guidance enabled APACI experts to make a number of recommendations for each country that included but were not limited to introducing new surveillance tools, broadening the use of specific existing surveillance tools, collecting and sharing data on virus characteristics, developing immunization status registries, and improving public health communication.
CONCLUSIONS: Influenza monitoring in Australia, China, and Malaysia could benefit from the expansion of existing surveillance sentinel schemes, the broadened use of laboratory confirmation and the introduction of excess-mortality modelling. The results from the evaluation can be used as a basis to support expert recommendations and to enhance influenza surveillance capabilities.
METHODS: 2010-2015 incidence data for influenza A (IAV), influenza B (IBV), respiratory syncytial (RSV) and parainfluenza (PIV) virus infections were collected from 18 sites (14 countries), consisting of local (n = 6), regional (n = 9) and national (n = 3) laboratories using molecular diagnostic methods. Each site submitted monthly virus incidence data, together with details of their patient populations tested and diagnostic assays used.
RESULTS: For the Northern Hemisphere temperate countries, the IAV, IBV and RSV incidence peaks were 2-6 months out of phase with those in the Southern Hemisphere, with IAV having a sharp out-of-phase difference at 6 months, whereas IBV and RSV showed more variable out-of-phase differences of 2-6 months. The tropical sites Singapore and Kuala Lumpur showed fluctuating incidence of these viruses throughout the year, whereas subtropical sites such as Hong Kong, Brisbane and Sydney showed distinctive biannual peaks for IAV but not for RSV and PIV.
CONCLUSIONS: There was a notable pattern of synchrony of IAV, IBV and RSV incidence peaks globally, and within countries with multiple sampling sites (Canada, UK, Australia), despite significant distances between these sites.