Please cite this paper as: Chittaganpitch et al. (2012) Influenza viruses in Thailand: 7 years of sentinel surveillance data, 2004–2010. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses 6(4), 276–283. Background  The re‐emergence of avian influenza A (H5N1) in 2004 and the pandemic of influenza A (H1N1) in 2009 highlight the need for routine surveillance systems to monitor influenza viruses, particularly in Southeast Asia where H5N1 is endemic in poultry. In 2004, the Thai National Institute of Health, in collaboration with the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, established influenza sentinel surveillance throughout Thailand. Objectives  To review routine epidemiologic and virologic surveillance for influenza viruses for public health action. Methods  Throat swabs from persons with influenza‐like illness and severe acute respiratory illness were collected at 11 sentinel sites during 2004–2010. Influenza viruses were identified using the standard protocol for polymerase chain reaction. Viruses were cultured and identified by immunofluorescence assay; strains were identified by hemagglutination inhibition assay. Data were analyzed to describe frequency, seasonality, and distribution of circulating strains. Results  Of the 19 457 throat swabs, 3967 (20%) were positive for influenza viruses: 2663 (67%) were influenza A and able to be subtyped [21% H1N1, 25% H3N2, 21% pandemic (pdm) H1N1] and 1304 (33%) were influenza B. During 2009–2010, the surveillance system detected three waves of pdm H1N1. Influenza annually presents two peaks, a major peak during the rainy season (June–August) and a minor peak in winter (October–February). Conclusions  These data suggest that March–April may be the most appropriate months for seasonal influenza vaccination in Thailand. This system provides a robust profile of the epidemiology of influenza viruses in Thailand and has proven useful for public health planning.

These data suggest that people in rural central Thailand may have experienced subclinical avian influenza infections as a result of yet unidentified environmental exposures. Lack of an indoor water source may play a role in transmission.

Although many causes were identified, most remain unknown.

JEV remains an important cause of encephalitis among hospitalized patients in Thailand. The high proportion of JE among encephalitis cases is concerning and additional public health prevention efforts or expanded vaccination may be needed.

BackgroundIn 2008, 800 rural Thai adults living within Kamphaeng Phet Province were enrolled in a prospective cohort study of zoonotic influenza transmission. Serological analyses of enrollment sera suggested this cohort had experienced subclinical avian influenza virus (AIV) infections with H9N2 and H5N1 viruses.MethodsAfter enrollment, participants were contacted weekly for 24mos for acute influenza-like illnesses (ILI). Cohort members confirmed to have influenza A infections were enrolled with their household contacts in a family transmission study involving paired sera and respiratory swab collections. Cohort members also provided sera at 12 and 24 months after enrollment. Serologic and real-time RT-PCR assays were performed against avian, swine, and human influenza viruses.ResultsOver the 2 yrs of follow-up, 81 ILI investigations in the cohort were conducted; 31 (38%) were identified as influenza A infections by qRT-PCR. Eighty-three household contacts were enrolled; 12 (14%) reported ILIs, and 11 (92%) of those were identified as influenza infections. A number of subjects were found to have slightly elevated antibodies against avian-like A/Hong Kong/1073/1999(H9N2) virus: 21 subjects (2.7%) at 12-months and 40 subjects (5.1%) at 24-months. Among these, two largely asymptomatic acute infections with H9N2 virus were detected by >4-fold increases in annual serologic titers (final titers 1∶80). While controlling for age and influenza vaccine receipt, moderate poultry exposure was significantly associated with elevated H9N2 titers (adjusted OR = 2.3; 95% CI, 1.04–5.2) at the 24-month encounter. One subject had an elevated titer (1∶20) against H5N1 during follow-up.ConclusionsFrom 2008–10, evidence for AIV infections was sparse among this rural population. Subclinical H9N2 AIV infections likely occurred, but serological results were confounded by antibody cross-reactions. There is a critical need for improved serological diagnostics to more accurately detect subclinical AIV infections in humans.