Background COVID-19 outbreaks in aged care facilities (ACFs) often have devastating consequences. However, epidemiologically these outbreaks are not well defined. We aimed to define such outbreaks in ACFs by systematically reviewing literature published during the current COVID-19 pandemic. Methods We searched 11 bibliographic databases for literature published on COVID-19 in ACFs between December 2019 and September 2020. Original studies reporting extractable epidemiological data as part of outbreak investigations or non-outbreak surveillance of ACFs were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. PROSPERO registration: CRD42020211424. Findings We identified 5,148 publications and selected 49 studies from four continents reporting data on 214,380 residents in 8,502 ACFs with 25,567 confirmed cases of COVID-19. Aged care residents form a distinct vulnerable population with single-facility attack rates of 45% [95% CI 32–58%] and case fatality rates of 23% [95% CI 18–28%]. Of the cases, 31% [95% CI 28–34%] were asymptomatic. The rate of hospitalization amongst residents was 37% [95% CI 35–39%]. Data from 21 outbreaks identified a resident as the index case in 58% of outbreaks and a staff member in 42%. Findings from the included studies were heterogeneous and of low to moderate quality in risk of bias assessment. Interpretation The clinical presentation of COVID-19 varies widely in ACFs residents, from asymptomatic to highly serious cases. Preventing the introduction of COVID-19 into ACFs is key, and both residents and staff are a priority group for COVID-19 vaccination. Rapid diagnosis, identification of primary and secondary cases and close contacts plus their isolation and quarantine are of paramount importance. Funding Queensland Advancing Clinical Research Fellowship awarded to Prof. Gulam Khandaker by Queensland Health's Health Innovation, Investment and Research Office (HIRO), Office of the Director-General.

Philip Campbell Hill and colleagues describe how they set up a population-based surveillance system to assess the impact of pneumococcal conjugate vaccines on invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) and radiological pneumonia in children in The Gambia.

No abstract

ObjectiveTo quantify the disparity in incidence of hepatitis B between indigenous and non-indigenous people in Australia, and to estimate the potential impact of a hepatitis B immunization programme targeting non-immune indigenous adults.MethodsUsing national data on persons with newly acquired hepatitis B disease notified between 2005 and 2012, we estimated incident infection rates and rate ratios comparing indigenous and non-indigenous people, with adjustments for underreporting. The potential impact of a hepatitis B immunization programme targeting non-immune indigenous adults was projected using a Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation model.FindingsOf the 54 522 persons with hepatitis B disease notified between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2012, 1953  infections were newly acquired. Acute hepatitis B infection notification rates were significantly higher for indigenous than non-indigenous Australians. The rates per 100 000 population for all ages were 3.6 (156/4 368 511) and 1.1 (1797/168 449 302) for indigenous and non-indigenous people respectively. The rate ratio of age-standardized notifications was 4.0 (95% confidence interval: 3.7–4.3). If 50% of non-immune indigenous adults (20% of all indigenous adults) were vaccinated over a 10-year programme a projected 527–549 new cases of acute hepatitis B would be prevented.ConclusionThere continues to be significant health inequity between indigenous and non-indigenous Australians in relation to vaccine-preventable hepatitis B disease. An immunization programme targeting indigenous Australian adults could have considerable impact in terms of cases of acute hepatitis B prevented, with a relatively low number needed to vaccinate to prevent each case.