Weekly Flu Report: May 27, 2010

Download Weekly Flu Report: Download Weekly_Report_5_27_10(Download PDF Weekly_Report_5_27_10)

As was the case two weeks ago, we are seeing a slight increase in the levels of flu-like illness, however, it is very possible that this is due to something other than the flu.

On a programming note, this will be the final weekly report for this flu season. Be sure to check back in the fall when we will start posting again. In the meantime, be sure to keep washing those hands, covering your coughs and sneezing into those elbows!

Have a wonderful and healthy summer!

 

Comments

[Bill]

I am a MA. employer and had all staff (20) get the seasonal and H1N1 flu shots last year. It is my expection that the season is required. If the got the H1N1 shot, will the need it again in 2010? -----------------------------------------------------
DPH RESPONDS: This year you will only need to get one flu shot. The new 2010-2011 flu vaccine will protect against seasonal flu and the 2009 H1N1 virus that caused so much illness last season.

[cheryle]

Are we still at level 6 pandemic? ----------------------------------DPH RESPONDS: Thank you for your question. The WHO committee that decides these things just met earlier this week, actually. As of that meeting, 2009 H1N1 remains at a 6 on the WHO pandemic scale. While activity in the US is very low, the scale is based on global circulation and there are enough countries still experiencing continuing H1N1 circulation that they felt that they could not lower the scale.

[laural]

To clarify what I mean, in your blog you do accurately describe that the data indicate an increase in flu like illness.

BUT on the report itself it says Flu Activity: No Activity.

That's how it's reported nationally to the CDC, correct? So the CDC weekly map of all the states will be reporting MA as no activity.
Yet these sentinal sites ARE HOW FLU is and was being tracked during and before the pandemic.
please explain why the indicator that always has indicated flu and did last year at this very time, to you may not mean flu...why say no activity?
curious!
thanks
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DPH RESPONDS: Thanks for your questions. The activity levels that we report to CDC are specifically defined and even if we are seeing an increase in Influenza-like illness (ILI), if there are no lab-confirmed cases to back that up it is still defined as “no activity.” As noted in the report, ILI is not specific and can be caused by a number of other conditions. During flu season it works very well as an indicator of flu activity; however, when flu is not circulating – which is marked by lab confirmed cases and is the reason that sites not only report activity but submit specimens – it often indicates something else. It is an unfortunate downside to the definition of ILI. When we’re not seeing lab confirmed flu, it is much more likely to fit into the “flu-like” category than to truly be flu. This late in the season, because we do not want to miss an unexpected upsurge in activity, we have been making calls to those sites reporting higher levels of ILI to ask them if they truly believe it is flu or if the case is getting counted simply because it meets the definition but does not have another known cause (which is often the case). We have also asked that they send specimens here for testing so we can feel more comfortable that it is not flu that is causing the increased ILI. Any specimens that we have received from these sites have tested negative here at the state lab.

Reporting by our ILINet sites is not state or federally mandated. The ILINet/Sentinel Site program is a completely voluntary program and sites are reporting with no compensation beyond recognition, free testing kits and a state epidemiologist they can call to ask questions. Although we encourage the sites to report early so we can have that information when we run our reports and make phone calls to sites throughout the season to encourage reporting, the reality is that many sites report after the reports have been run. It is not ideal, but we would rather have the data late than not at all and it will show up in that 3-year line chart as the adjusted number the following week.

While ILI data and the ILINet program have their drawbacks, this system has been shown year after year to act as a useful and valid tool – used in conjunction with other data like numbers of laboratory-confirmed cases – to track the flu season and get a rough estimate of activity each week.

[laural]

Can you explain the seemingly contradition between the report saying "no flu activity"
and the increase you note above?
I see that the flu rate, or rather Influenza like illness rate as you point out, is almost as high as it was last year at this time during the "spring wave" of the swine flu, and is going up.

How then can you say there is no flu activity?
Also, I noticed ongoingly that many and often MOST of the sentinal sites do NOT report in any given week. I noticed this even during the height of the winte pandemic wave. I wondered if anything is being done to gather the data proactively from them or increase their complance to reporting. It feel so odd that almost alway so many sites are allowed, seemingly, NOT to report. Again, often the majority in a area do not. For example, if TWO of SIX possible sites report, the data isnt nearly as good. N=2 doesn't give nearly as good a picture as N=6, for one thing. Please explain. I hope also that compliance to reporting can be increased. We may still be in a relative 'lull" and not a flu emergency, isn't this a good time to increase reporting for when it will be even more pivitol? Perhaps I am not understanding something.