Antiviral treatment and prophylaxis of influenza in primary care: German recommendations

Wutzler, Peter; Kossow, Klaus-Dieter; Lode, H.; Ruf, B.; Scholz, Hanna; Vogel, G

doi:10.1016/j.jcv.2004.05.009

Cited by 25 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition, it is intended to use antivirals for diseased as well as prophylactic use in a pandemic situation until effective vaccines become be available [14] . There are two classes of anti-infl uenza virus drugs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although the emergence of drug resistance to M2 inhibitors remains a concern [17,20,22] , these compounds provide an additional tool to treat patients in fl u epidemics when vaccines or neuraminidase inhibitors are lacking or not working [14] . Because new reassorted viruses from swine might affect the effi cacy of antiviral therapy, the amantadine susceptibility of porcine infl uenza A viruses isolated in Germany between 1981 and 2001 was studied in plaque-reduction assays in MDCK cells.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Amantadine Resistance among Porcine H1N1, H1N2, and H3N2 Influenza A Viruses Isolated in Germany between 1981 and 2001

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was designed to gain insight into amantadine susceptibility of porcine influenza A viruses isolated in Germany between 1981 and 2001. The 12 studied H1N1, H1N2, and H3N2 porcine influenza virus strains were isolated in chicken eggs and passaged once in MDCK cells. Plaque reduction assays were applied to examine virus susceptibility to amantadine. Genotyping was used to confirm drug resistance. In the results of these antiviral studies, only 3 of the 12 isolates were shown to be amantadine-susceptible. All resistant strains contained the AA substitutions G16E, S31N, and R77Q in the membrane protein 2 (M2). Additionally, L27A was detected in two H1N1 strains. S31N and/or L27A are well-known amino acid substitutions in M2 that confer amantadine resistance. The role of the pig as an intermediate host of avian and human influenza A viruses, the possible involvement of genetic reassortment, and the high incidence of naturally amantadine-resistant porcine influenza A viruses suggest a real risk of emergence of amantadine resistant human viruses. Therefore, drug susceptibility monitoring appears to be warranted for effective application of those drugs.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Amantadine Resistance among Porcine H1N1, H1N2, and H3N2 Influenza A Viruses Isolated in Germany between 1981 and 2001

et al. 2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Vaccination is necessary for primary protection from infl uenza (4,5). Health professionals are the target group for infl uenza vaccination because of their increased risk.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Primary healthcare professionals’ knowledge, attitude and behavior regarding influenza immunization; 2006–2007 season adverse effect profile

Mistik

Balcı²,

Elmalı³

2012

BLL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Objective: The objective of this study was to assess primary healthcare professionals' knowledge, attitude and behavior regarding immunization, as well as to evaluate the adverse effect profi le for the 2006-2007 infl uenza vaccines. Background: Infl uenza vaccination has been proven to have clinical and epidemiological benefi ts. However, its uptake in the general population and among healthcare workers has generally been suboptimal. The adverse effects reported were fever (n=57; 13.5 %), muscle pain (n=60; 14.2 %), joint pain (n=40; 9.5 %), loss of appetite (n=16; 3.8%), headache (n=41; 9.7 %), cough (n=29; 6.9 %), malaise (n=76; 18.0 %), tiredness (n=41; 9.7 %), stuffi ness (n=49; 11.6 %), sneezing (n=54; 12.8 %), sore throat (n=33; 7.8 %) and others, namely erythema, edema and abscess at the vaccination site, and lymphadenopathy (n=14; 3.3 %). Conclusion: Our study demonstrated that primary health care professionals in our study group have been vaccinated with infl uenza vaccine in a reasonable percentage. There were no severe or serious adverse effects of the vaccine, the fact of which may be used to encourage both health professionals and patients of primary care (Tab. 3, Ref. 13). Full Text in PDF www.elis.sk.

show abstract

“…The prophylactic usage of oseltamivir has been included in several guidelines [11][12][13]. According to the recent Slovenian national recommendations for prophylactic usage of oseltamivir in long-term care residents (available from March 2012, i.e.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Along with nonpharmacological measures to prevent introduction and spread of the virus in NHs, antiviral prophylaxis and treatment is recommended for outbreak control [11][12][13][14][15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Oseltamivir prophylaxis in controlling influenza outbreak in nursing homes: a comparison between three different approaches

Miksić

Uršič²,

Simonović³

et al. 2014

Infection

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Antiviral treatment and prophylaxis of influenza in primary care: German recommendations

Cited by 25 publications

References 41 publications

Amantadine Resistance among Porcine H1N1, H1N2, and H3N2 Influenza A Viruses Isolated in Germany between 1981 and 2001

Amantadine Resistance among Porcine H1N1, H1N2, and H3N2 Influenza A Viruses Isolated in Germany between 1981 and 2001

Primary healthcare professionals’ knowledge, attitude and behavior regarding influenza immunization; 2006–2007 season adverse effect profile

Oseltamivir prophylaxis in controlling influenza outbreak in nursing homes: a comparison between three different approaches

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About