BackgroundAfter the 2009 influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 pandemic, China established its first severe acute respiratory infections (SARI) sentinel surveillance system.MethodsWe analyzed data from SARI cases in 10 hospitals in 10 provinces in China from February 2011 to October 2013.ResultsAmong 5,644 SARI cases, 330 (6%) were influenza-positive. Among these, 62% were influenza A and 38% were influenza B. Compared with influenza-negative cases, influenza-positive SARI cases had a higher median age (20.0 years vs.11.0, p = 0.003) and were more likely to have at least one underlying chronic medical condition (age adjusted percent: 28% vs. 25%, p < 0.001). The types/subtypes of dominant strains identified by SARI surveillance was almost always among dominant strains identified by the influenza like illness (ILI) surveillance system and influenza activity in both systems peaked at the same time.ConclusionsData from China’s first SARI sentinel surveillance system suggest that types/subtypes of circulating influenza strains and epidemic trends among SARI cases were similar to those among ILI cases.

Background This study was intended to investigate the epidemiological characteristics of COVID-19 clusters and the severity distribution of clinical symptoms of involved cases in Sichuan Province, so as to provide information support for the development and adjustment of strategies for the prevention and control of local clusters. Methods The epidemiological characteristics of 67 local clusters of COVID-19 cases in Sichuan Province reported as of March 17, 2020 were described and analyzed. Information about all COVID-19 clusters and involved cases was acquired from the China Information System for Disease Control and Prevention and analyzed with the epidemiological investigation results taken into account. Results The clusters were temporally and regionally concentrated. Clusters caused by imported cases from other provinces accounted for 73.13%; familial clusters accounted for 68.66%; the average attack rate was 8.54%, and the average secondary attack rate was 6.11%; the median incubation period was 8.5 d; a total of 28 cases met the criteria for incubation period determination, and in the 28 cases, the incubation period was > 14 d in 21.43% (6/28). a total of 226 confirmed cases were reported in the 67 clusters. Ten cases were exposed before the confirmed cases they contacted with developed clinical symptoms, and the possibility of exposure to other infection sources was ruled out; two clusters were caused by asymptomatic carriers; confirmed cases mainly presented with fever, respiratory and systemic symptoms; a gradual decline in the severity of clinical symptoms was noted with the increase of the case generation. Conclusions Population movement and gathering restrictions and strict close contact management measures will significantly contribute to the identification and control of cases. Transmission during the incubation period and asymptomatic infections have been noted. Studies on the pathogenicity and transmissibility in these populations and on COVID-19 antibody levels and protective effects in healthy people and cases are required.

BackgroundDescriptions of single clinical symptoms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been widely reported. However, evidence of symptoms associations was still limited. We sought to explore the potential symptom clustering patterns and high-frequency symptom combinations of COVID-19 to enhance the understanding of people of this disease.MethodsIn this retrospective cohort study, a total of 1,067 COVID-19 cases were enrolled. Symptom clustering patterns were first explored by a text clustering method. Then, a multinomial logistic regression was applied to reveal the population characteristics of different symptom groups. In addition, time intervals between symptoms onset and the first visit were analyzed to consider the effect of time interval extension on the progression of symptoms.ResultsBased on text clustering, the symptoms were summarized into four groups. Group 1: no-obvious symptoms; Group 2: mainly fever and/or dry cough; Group 3: mainly upper respiratory tract infection symptoms; Group 4: mainly cardiopulmonary, systemic, and/or gastrointestinal symptoms. Apart from Group 1 with no obvious symptoms, the most frequent symptom combinations were fever only (64 cases, 47.8%), followed by dry cough only (42 cases, 31.3%) in Group 2; expectoration only (21 cases, 19.8%), followed by expectoration complicated with fever (10 cases, 9.4%) in Group 3; fatigue complicated with fever (12 cases, 4.2%), followed by headache complicated with fever was also high (11 cases, 3.8%) in Group 4. People aged 45–64 years were more likely to have symptoms of Group 4 than those aged 65 years or older (odds ratio [OR] = 2.66, 95% CI: 1.21–5.85) and at the same time had longer time intervals.ConclusionsSymptoms of COVID-19 could be divided into four clustering groups with different symptom combinations. The Group 4 symptoms (i.e., mainly cardiopulmonary, systemic, and/or gastrointestinal symptoms) happened more frequently in COVID-19 than in influenza. This distinction could help deepen the understanding of this disease. The middle-aged people have a longer time interval for medical visit and was a group that deserve more attention, from the perspective of medical delays.

No abstract

Objectives: To explore and understand the SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence of convalescents, the association between antibody levels and demographic factors, and the seroepidemiology of convalescents of COVID-19 till March 2021.Methods: We recruited 517 voluntary COVID-19 convalescents in Sichuan Province and collected 1,707 serum samples till March 2021. Then we reported the seroprevalence and analyzed the associated factors.Results: Recent travel history was associated with IgM levels. Convalescents who had recent travel history were less likely to be IgM antibody negative [OR = 0.232, 95% CI: (0.128, 0.420)]. Asymptomatic cases had, approximately, twice the odds of being IgM antibody negative compared with symptomatic cases [OR = 2.583, 95% CI: (1.554, 4.293)]. Participants without symptoms were less likely to be IgG seronegative than those with symptoms [OR = 0.511, 95% CI: (0.293, 0.891)]. Convalescents aged 40–59 were less likely to be IgG seronegative than those aged below 20 [OR = 0.364, 95% CI: (0.138, 0.959)]. The duration of positive IgM antibodies persisted 365 days while the IgG persisted more than 399 days.Conclusions: Our findings suggested that recent travel history might be associated with the antibody levels of IgM, while age could be associated with the antibody levels of IgG. Infection type could be associated with both antibody levels of IgM and IgG that declined quicker in asymptomatic cases.