Rotavirus remains a leading cause of diarrhoeal morbidity and mortality in young children and rotavirus vaccines are critical for reducing global disease burden. This report addresses the performance of rotavirus vaccines in countries with high child mortality. We performed a sensitivity analysis as part of a systematic review on rotavirus vaccines to inform development of World Health Organization vaccine recommendations. The efficacy of four prequalified vaccines against severe rotavirus gastroenteritis was similar across high mortality settings in Asia and Africa. Within the first year following vaccination, vaccine efficacy for the four vaccines ranged from 48% to 57% while in the second year, efficacy ranged from 29% to 54%. The four vaccines showed no increase in intussusception risk in these settings. All four vaccines appear to prevent significant numbers of severe rotavirus gastroenteritis episodes with no measurable increase in intussusception risk in high mortality settings in Africa and Asia.

BACKGROUND: Pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV) and rotavirus vaccine (RV) are key tools for reducing common causes of infant mortality. However, measurement of population-level mortality impact is lacking from sub-Saharan Africa. We evaluated mortality impact and vaccine effectiveness (VE) of PCV13 introduced in November 2011, with subsequent RV1 roll-out in October 2012, in Malawi. METHODS: We conducted two independent community-based birth cohort studies. Study 1, in northern Malawi (40000population), evaluated population impact using change-point analysis and negative-binomial regression of non-traumatic 14-51-week infant mortality preintroduction (1 January 2004 to 31 September 2011) and postintroduction (1 October 2011 to 1 July 2019), and against three-dose coverage. Study 2, in central Malawi (465 000 population), was recruited from 24 November 2011 to 1 June 2015. In the absence of preintroduction data, individual three-dose versus zero-dose VE was estimated using individual-level Cox survival models. In both cohorts, infants were followed with household visits to ascertain vaccination, socioeconomic and survival status. Verbal autopsies were conducted for deaths. RESULTS: Study 1 included 20 291 live births and 216 infant deaths. Mortality decreased by 28.6% (95% CI: 15.3 to 39.8) post-PCV13 introduction. A change point was identified in November 2012. Study 2 registered 50 731 live births, with 454 deaths. Infant mortality decreased from 17 to 10/1000 live births during the study period. Adjusted VE was 44.6% overall (95% CI: 23.0 to 59.1) and 48.3% (95% CI: -5.9 to 74.1) against combined acute respiratory infection, meningitis and sepsis-associated mortality. CONCLUSION: These data provide population-level evidence of infant mortality reduction following sequential PCV13 and RV1 introduction into an established immunisation programme in Malawi. These data support increasing coverage of vaccine programmes in high-burden settings.

INTRODUCTION: Rotavirus vaccine (Rotarix®, RV1) has reduced diarrhea-associated hospitalizations and deaths in Malawi. We examined the trends in circulating rotavirus genotypes in Malawi over a 22-year period to assess the impact of RV1 introduction on strain distribution. METHODS: Data on rotavirus-positive stool specimens among children age <5 years hospitalized with diarrhea in Blantyre, Malawi before (July 1997 - October 2012, n=1765) and after (November 2012 - October 2019, n=934) RV1 introduction were analyzed. Rotavirus G and P genotypes were assigned using reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: A rich rotavirus strain diversity circulated throughout the 22-year period; Shannon (H) and Simpson diversity (D) indices did not differ between the pre- and post-vaccine periods (H' p < 0.149: D' p < 0.287). Overall, G1 (n=268/924; 28.7%), G2 (n=308/924; 33.0%), G3 (n=72/924; 7.7%) and G12 (n=109/924; 11.8%) were the most prevalent genotypes identified following RV1 introduction. The prevalence of G1P[8] and G2P[4] genotypes declined each successive year following RV1 introduction, and were not detected after 2018. Genotype G3 re-emerged and became the predominant genotype from 2017. No evidence of genotype selection was observed seven years post-RV1 introduction. CONCLUSION: Rotavirus strain diversity and genotype variation in Malawi is likely driven by natural mechanisms rather than vaccine pressure.

Binge drinking* is a leading preventable public health problem. From 2006 to 2010, binge drinking contributed to approximately 49,000 annual deaths resulting from acute conditions (e.g., injuries and violence) (1). Binge drinking also increases the risk for adverse health conditions, including some chronic diseases (e.g., breast cancer) and fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (2). In 2004, 2013, and again in 2018, for all U.S. adults aged >/=18 years in primary care, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended alcohol screening and brief intervention (alcohol SBI) or counseling for persons whose screening indicated drinking in excess of recommended limits or in ways that increase risk for poor health outcomes (3-5). However, previous CDC surveillance data indicate that patients report rarely talking to their provider about alcohol use,(dagger) and alcohol SBI is traditionally delivered through conversation. CDC recently analyzed 2017 data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) survey's five-question module, which asked adults in 13 states( section sign) and the District of Columbia (DC) about the delivery of alcohol SBI during their most recent checkup in the past 2 years. Overall, 81.4% of adults (age-standardized estimate) reported being asked about alcohol use by a health professional in person or on a form during a checkup in the past 2 years, but only 37.8% reported being asked a question about binge-level alcohol consumption, which is included on USPSTF recommended instruments (3). Among module respondents who were asked about alcohol use at a checkup in the past 2 years and reported current binge drinking (past 30 days) at time of survey, only 41.7% were advised about the harms of drinking too much at a checkup in the past 2 years, and only 20.1% were advised to reduce or quit drinking at a checkup in the past 2 years. These findings suggest that missed opportunities remain for health care providers to intervene with patients who report binge drinking. Working to implement alcohol SBI at a systems level, including the provision of the new Healthcare Effectiveness Data Information Set (HEDIS) measure, Unhealthy Alcohol Use Screening and Follow-Up, can improve alcohol SBI's use and benefit in primary care.

INTRODUCTION: Excessive alcohol use is associated with car crashes, violence, and multiple disease conditions, including fetal alcohol spectrum disorders. The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommends that primary care providers screen all adults and conduct brief counseling interventions with those who misuse alcohol. The USPSTF prefers use of three screening tools that measure alcohol consumption (Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test, Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test-Consumption, and National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Single Question) because these tools detect the full spectrum of alcohol misuse in adults. This study estimated the prevalence of primary care provider screening practices for alcohol misuse and examined factors associated with using a USPSTF-preferred screening tool. METHODS: In 2016, a cross-sectional analysis was conducted on self-reported 2016 DocStyles data to estimate the prevalence of different screening tools used by 1,506 primary care providers-family practitioners, internists, obstetrician/gynecologists, and nurse practitioners. Adjusted prevalence ratios were calculated using logistic regression to examine the association between provider attributes and use of USPSTF-preferred screening tools. RESULTS: In this study, 96% of providers reported screening patients for alcohol misuse. Among those that screened, 38% used a USPSTF-preferred screening tool. Provider specialty, awareness of USPSTF guidelines, and mode of administering screening tool were associated with using a preferred screening tool. CONCLUSIONS: Although most primary care providers reported screening for alcohol misuse, about two thirds did not use a tool capable of detecting the full spectrum of alcohol misuse. Using suitable screening tools will better identify patients who misuse alcohol and increase the opportunity for appropriate intervention, ultimately helping to reduce the burden from the many conditions associated with excessive alcohol consumption.

Excessive or risky alcohol use is a preventable cause of significant morbidity and mortality in the U.S. and worldwide. Alcohol use is a common preventable cancer risk factor among young adults; it is associated with increased risk of developing at least six types of cancer. Alcohol consumed during early adulthood may pose a higher risk of female breast cancer than alcohol consumed later in life. Reducing alcohol use may help prevent cancer. Alcohol misuse screening and brief counseling or intervention (also called alcohol screening and brief intervention among other designations) is known to reduce excessive alcohol use, and the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends that it be implemented for all adults aged ≥18 years in primary healthcare settings. Because the prevalence of excessive alcohol use, particularly binge drinking, peaks among young adults, this time of life may present a unique window of opportunity to talk about the cancer risk associated with alcohol use and how to reduce that risk by reducing excessive drinking or misuse. This article briefly describes alcohol screening and brief intervention, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's recommended approach, and suggests a role for it in the context of cancer prevention. The article also briefly discusses how the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is working to make alcohol screening and brief intervention a routine element of health care in all primary care settings to identify and help young adults who drink too much.

Excessive and/or risky alcohol use resulted in $249 billion in economic costs in 2010 (1) and >88,000 deaths in the United States every year from 2006 to 2010 (2). It is associated with birth defects and disabilities (e.g., fetal alcohol spectrum disorders [FASDs]), increases in chronic diseases (e.g., heart disease and breast cancer), and injuries and violence (e.g., motor vehicle crashes, suicide, and homicide).dagger Since 2004, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) has recommended alcohol misuse screening and brief counseling (also known as alcohol screening and brief intervention or ASBI) for adults aged ≥18 years (3). section sign Among adults, ASBI reduces episodes of binge-level consumption, reduces weekly alcohol consumption, and increases compliance with recommended drinking limits in those who have an intervention in comparison to those who do not (3). A recent study suggested that health care providers rarely talk with patients about alcohol use (4). To estimate the prevalence of U.S. adults who reported receiving elements of ASBI, CDC analyzed 2014 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data from 17 states paragraph sign and the District of Columbia (DC). Weighted crude and age-standardized overall and state-level prevalence estimates were calculated by selected drinking patterns and demographic characteristics. Overall, 77.7% of adults (age-standardized estimate) reported being asked about alcohol use by a health professional in person or on a form during a checkup, but only 32.9% reported being asked about binge-level alcohol consumption (3). Among binge drinkers, only 37.2% reported being asked about alcohol use and advised about the harms of drinking too much, and only 18.1% reported being asked about alcohol use and advised to reduce or quit drinking. Widespread implementation of ASBI and other evidence-based interventions could help reduce excessive alcohol use in adults and related harms.

CONTEXT: Excessive drinking is responsible for one in ten deaths among working-age adults in the U.S. annually. Alcohol screening and brief intervention is an effective but underutilized intervention for reducing excessive drinking among adults. Electronic screening and brief intervention (e-SBI) uses electronic devices to deliver key elements of alcohol screening and brief intervention, with the potential to expand population reach. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: Using Community Guide methods, a systematic review of the scientific literature on the effectiveness of e-SBI for reducing excessive alcohol consumption and related harms was conducted. The search covered studies published from 1967 to October 2011. A total of 31 studies with 36 study arms met quality criteria and were included in the review. Analyses were conducted in 2012. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Twenty-four studies (28 study arms) provided results for excessive drinkers only and seven studies (eight study arms) reported results for all drinkers. Nearly all studies found that e-SBI reduced excessive alcohol consumption and related harms: nine study arms reported a median 23.9% reduction in binge-drinking intensity (maximum drinks/binge episode) and nine study arms reported a median 16.5% reduction in binge-drinking frequency. Reductions in drinking measures were sustained for up to 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: According to Community Guide rules of evidence, e-SBI is an effective method for reducing excessive alcohol consumption and related harms among intervention participants. Implementation of e-SBI could complement population-level strategies previously recommended by the Community Preventive Services Task Force for reducing excessive drinking (e.g., increasing alcohol taxes and regulating alcohol outlet density).

INTRODUCTION: The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends for adults alcohol screening and brief behavioral counseling interventions in primary care settings. However, there is a paucity of population-based data on the prevalence of alcohol screening. This study examines adherence to this U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation by estimating the prevalence of alcohol screening by demographic characteristics and binge drinking. METHODS: A cross-sectional analysis was conducted in 2013 and 2014 on data from the 2013 fall wave of the ConsumerStyles survey. ConsumerStyles is drawn from an Internet panel randomly recruited by probability-based sampling to be representative of the U.S. POPULATION: Data from 2,592 adult respondents who visited primary care physicians in the last year were analyzed to determine the prevalence of alcohol screening. RESULTS: Only 24.7% of respondents reported receiving alcohol screening. The prevalence of screening was similar among women (24.9%) and men (24.5%). Black non-Hispanics reported a significantly lower prevalence of screening than white non-Hispanics (16.2% vs 26.9%, prevalence ratio=0.60, 95% CI=0.40, 0.90). College graduates reported a significantly higher prevalence of screening than respondents with a high school degree or less (28.1% vs 20.8%, prevalence ratio=1.35, 95% CI=1.08, 1.69). CONCLUSIONS: Only about one in four respondents who visited a primary care physician in the last year reported being screened for alcohol misuse. Therefore, many men and women who misuse alcohol are unlikely to be identified. Increased screening may help reduce alcohol misuse and related negative health outcomes.

Molecular identification of the invasion plasmid antigen-H (ipaH) gene has been established as a useful detection mechanism for Shigella spp. The Global Enteric Multicenter Study (GEMS) identified the etiology and burden of moderate-to-severe diarrhea (MSD) in sub-Saharan Africa and south Asia using a case-control study and traditional culture techniques. Here, we used quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) to identify Shigella spp. in 2,611 stool specimens from GEMS and compared these results to those using culture. Demographic and nutritional characteristics were assessed as possible risk factors. The qPCR identified more cases of shigellosis than culture; however, the distribution of demographic characteristics was similar by both methods. In regression models adjusting for Shigella quantity, age, and site, children who were exclusively breast-fed had significantly lower odds of MSD compared with children who were not breast-fed (odds ratio [OR] = 0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.28-0.81). The association between Shigella quantity and MSD increased with age, with a peak in children of 24-35 months of age (OR = 8.2, 95% CI = 4.3-15.7) and the relationship between Shigella quantity and disease was greatest in Bangladesh (OR = 13.2, 95% CI = 7.3-23.8). This study found that qPCR identified more cases of Shigella and age, site, and breast-feeding status were significant risk factors for MSD.

Pathogens in the gastrointestinal tract exist within a vast population of microbes. We examined associations between pathogens and composition of gut microbiota as they relate to Shigella spp./enteroinvasive Escherichia coli infection. We analyzed 3,035 stool specimens (1,735 nondiarrheal and 1,300 moderate-to-severe diarrheal) from the Global Enteric Multicenter Study for 9 enteropathogens. Diarrheal specimens had a higher number of enteropathogens (diarrheal mean 1.4, nondiarrheal mean 0.95; p<0.0001). Rotavirus showed a negative association with Shigella spp. in cases of diarrhea (odds ratio 0.31, 95% CI 0.17-0.55) and had a large combined effect on moderate-to-severe diarrhea (odds ratio 29, 95% CI 3.8-220). In 4 Lactobacillus taxa identified by 16S rRNA gene sequencing, the association between pathogen and disease was decreased, which is consistent with the possibility that Lactobacillus spp. are protective against Shigella spp.-induced diarrhea. Bacterial diversity of gut microbiota was associated with diarrhea status, not high levels of the Shigella spp. ipaH gene.

BACKGROUND: Research on screening and brief interventions (SBI) for substance misuse has demonstrated efficacy in a variety of medical settings including emergency departments and trauma centers. However, SBI has not yet been evaluated for persons who incur traumatic brain injury (TBI)-a substantial patient subpopulation for whom substance-related problems are frequent. To examine whether research on SBI efficacy and effectiveness can be generalized to persons with TBI, a systematic review of the literature was conducted to analyze how TBI populations were included in previous studies and whether there was evidence of differential outcomes. METHODS: Peer-reviewed studies that investigated SBI for misuse of alcohol or other drugs, that were implemented in emergency departments or trauma centers, and that were published in English since 1985 were examined. From 174 articles initially identified, 28 studies were determined to meet inclusion criteria. RESULTS: The review revealed that research conducted on SBI for injury populations systematically neglected patients with more severe TBI and those who presented with sufficient confusion that they could not provide informed consent. CONCLUSIONS: Future effectiveness studies should examine barriers to routine clinical use of SBI and evaluate the generalizability of expected benefits to the full spectrum of injured patients. Researchers should also develop and evaluate systematic accommodations for persons with neurobehavioral impairments who would benefit from brief interventions for substance misuse.

INTRODUCTION: Alcohol consumption is a significant risk factor for injuries. Further, level I trauma centres are mandated to screen and provide a brief intervention for identified problem drinkers. However, a valid population-based estimate of the magnitude of the problem is unknown. Therefore, the goal of this study is to evaluate the extent to which the present literature provides a valid estimate of the prevalence of alcohol-related visits to U.S. trauma centres. METHODS: A Medline search for all articles from 1966 to 2007 that might provide prevalence estimates of alcohol-related visits to U.S. trauma centres yielded 836 articles in English language journals. This review included only papers whose main or secondary goal was to estimate the prevalence of positive blood alcohol concentration (BAC) or acute intoxication. Both a crude aggregate estimate and sample size adjusted estimate were calculated from the included papers and the coverage and comparability of methods were evaluated. RESULTS: Of the 15 studies that met inclusion criteria, incidence estimates of alcohol-related visits ranged from 26.2% to 62.5% and yielded an aggregate, weighted estimate of 32.5%. Target population, capture rate, and threshold for a positive screening result varied considerably across studies. No study provided a comprehensive estimate, i.e., of all trauma patients hospitalised, treated and released, or who died. CONCLUSIONS: Although the incidence of alcohol-related visits to U.S. trauma centres appears very high perhaps higher than any other medical setting, the validity of our aggregate estimate is threatened by crucial methodological considerations. The lack of a methodologically valid prevalence estimate hinders efforts to devise appropriate policies for trauma centres and across medical settings.

According to the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), alcohol is the most important risk to health in low- and middle-income countries in the Americas and the second in developed countries (Monteiro, 1993). Despite regional variation, alcohol consumption in the Americas averaged more than 50% higher than worldwide consumption (Rehm & Monteiro, Citation2005). The biggest problem is not alcoholism, but excessive consumption by people who drink socially. | In Colombia, the relationship between alcohol use and injuries has not been well studied. In a national survey (Republica de Colombia, Ministerio del Interior y de Justicia. Direccion Nacional de Estupefacientes. Estudio Nacional sobre Consumo de Sustancias Sicoactivas. Departamento Nacional de Estupefacientes, Citation1996), 59.8% of respondents consumed alcohol in the previous year and 35% in the last month. The Forensic Medicine Institute, which tests blood alcohol concentration (BAC) identified excessive consumption as a precipitating factor for child maltreatment, and intimate partner violence (Forensis, Datos para la Vida. Instituto Nacional de Medicina Legal y Ciencias Forenses, Citation2006). In 2006, 13% of homicides and 17% of road traffic-related deaths had a positive BAC (C.E. Betancourt, S. Morales, & K. Balvuena, personal communication, September 2008). The Road Traffic Prevention Foundation reported that alcohol consumption was also an important cause of pedestrian injuries (Fondo de Prevención Vial – Fonvial, Citation2005).

This article summarizes the work and discussions of the funding and sustainability work group at the 2009 Academic Emergency Medicine consensus conference "Public Health in the ED: Surveillance, Screening, and Intervention." The funding and sustainability session participants were asked to address the following overarching question: "What are the opportunities and what is needed to encourage academic emergency medicine (EM) to take advantage of the opportunities for funding available for public health research initiatives and build stronger academic programs focusing on public health within EM?" Prior to the session, members of the group reviewed research funding for EM in public health, as well as the priorities of federal agencies and foundations. Recommendations for actions by EM summarize the findings of workshop.

In the United States, excessive alcohol consumption is responsible for more than $180 billion in economic costs per year and is the third leading preventable cause of death (Harwood, 2000, Mokdad et al., 2005). The single greatest contributor to alcohol-related mortality in the United States is unintentional injury, accounting for approximately 26,000 deaths per year (CDC, 2004) and placing a substantial burden on emergency departments (EDs). In this study we analyzed 2001 data from a nationally representative sample of hospital EDs to examine characteristics of ED visits for alcohol-related unintentional traumatic injuries and compared them with visits for unintentional traumatic injuries for which alcohol use was not noted in the ED medical chart.