Surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 through reported positive RT-PCR tests is biased due to non-random testing. Prevalence estimation in population-based samples corrects for this bias. Within this context, the pooled testing design offers many advantages, but several challenges remain with regards to the analysis of such data. We developed a Bayesian model aimed at estimating the prevalence of infection from repeated pooled testing data while (i) correcting for test sensitivity; (ii) propagating the uncertainty in test sensitivity; and (iii) including correlation over time and space. We validated the model in simulated scenarios, showing that the model is reliable when the sample size is at least 500, the pool size below 20, and the true prevalence below 5%. We applied the model to 1.49 million pooled tests collected in Switzerland in 2021–2022 in schools, care centres, and workplaces. We identified similar dynamics in all three settings, with prevalence peaking at 4–5% during winter 2022. We also identified differences across regions. Prevalence estimates in schools were correlated with reported cases, hospitalizations, and deaths (coefficient 0.84 to 0.90). We conclude that in many practical situations, the pooled test design is a reliable and affordable alternative for the surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 and other viruses.

Real-time evaluation (RTE) supports populations (e.g., persons experiencing homelessness (PEH) to engage in evaluation of health interventions who may otherwise be overlooked. The aim of this RTE was to explore the understanding of TB amongst PEH, identify barriers/facilitators to attending screening for PEH alongside suggestions for improving TB-screening events targeting PEH, who have high and complex health needs. This RTE composed of free-text structured one-to-one interviews performed immediately after screening at a single tuberculosis (TB) screening event. Handwritten forms were transcribed for thematic analysis, with codes ascribed to answers that were developed into core themes. All RTE participants (n=15) learned about the screening event on the day it was held. Key concerns amongst screening attendees included: stigma around drug use, not understanding the purpose of TB screening, lack of trusted individuals/services present, too many partner organizations involved, and language barriers. Facilitators to screening included a positive welcome to the event, a satisfactory explanation of screening tests, and sharing of results. A need for improved event promotion alongside communication of the purpose of TB screening amongst PEH was also identified. A lack of trust identified by some participants suggests the range of services present should be reconsidered for future screening events.

We recently described a simple model through which we assessed what effect subjecting travellers to a single on-arrival test might have on reducing risk of importing disease cases during simulated outbreaks of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), influenza, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Ebola. We build upon this work to allow for the additional requirement that inbound travellers also undergo a period of self-isolation upon arrival, where upon completion the traveller is again tested for signs of infection prior to admission across the border. Prior results indicated that a single on-arrival test has the potential to detect 9% of travellers infected with COVID-19, compared to 35%, 10% and 3% for travellers infected with influenza, SARS and Ebola, respectively. Our extended model shows that testing administered after a 2-day isolation period could detect up to 41%, 97%, 44% and 15% of COVID-19, influenza, SARS and Ebola infected travellers, respectively. Longer self-isolation periods increase detection rates further, with an 8-day self-isolation period suggesting detection rates of up to 94%, 100%, 98% and 62% for travellers infected with COVID-19, influenza, SARS and Ebola, respectively. These results therefore suggest that testing arrivals after an enforced period of self-isolation may present a reasonable method of protecting against case importation during international outbreaks.

The effectiveness of screening travellers during times of international disease outbreak is contentious, especially as the reduction in the risk of disease importation can be very small. Border screening typically consists of travellers being thermally scanned for signs of fever and/or completing a survey declaring any possible symptoms prior to admission to their destination country; while more thorough testing typically exists, these would generally prove more disruptive to deploy. In this paper, we describe a simple Monte Carlo based model that incorporates the epidemiology of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) to investigate the potential decrease in risk of disease importation that might be achieved by requiring travellers to undergo screening upon arrival during the current pandemic. This is a purely theoretical study to investigate the maximum impact that might be attained by deploying a test or testing programme simply at the point of entry, through which we may assess such action in the real world as a method of decreasing the risk of importation. We, therefore, assume ideal conditions such as 100% compliance among travellers and the use of a ‘perfect’ test. In addition to COVID-19, we also apply the presented model to simulated outbreaks of influenza, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Ebola for comparison. Our model only considers screening implemented at airports, being the predominant method of international travel. Primary results showed that in the best-case scenario, screening at the point of entry may detect a maximum of 8.8% of travellers infected with COVID-19, compared to 34.8.%, 9.7% and 3.0% for travellers infected with influenza, SARS and Ebola respectively. While results appear to indicate that screening is more effective at preventing disease ingress when the disease in question has a shorter average incubation period, our results suggest that screening at the point of entry alone does not represent a sufficient method to adequately protect a nation from the importation of COVID-19 cases.

Tuberculosis (TB) in older people is a significant public health problem in low TB-incidence countries. Older persons have increased TB incidence, higher reactivation and mortality. A delay in diagnosis and initiation of TB treatment in patients with atypical clinical and radiological features is a significant factor of widespread transmission. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of interferon-gamma release assays [IGRAs; QuantiFERON®-TB Gold In-Tube (QFT) and T-SPOT®.TB (T-SPOT)] compared to the tuberculin skin test (TST) and chest X-ray (CXR) examination for TB screening for nursing homes. Decision trees and Markov models were constructed using a societal perspective on a lifetime horizon. Seven strategies: no screening, TST, QFT, T-SPOT, TST followed by QFT, TST followed by T-SPOT, and CXR were considered. QFT [US$ 401·9, 4·36 707 QALY (year 2014 values)] was the most cost-effective at the willingness-to-pay level of US$ 50 000/QALY gained. TST followed by QFT was the most cost-effective in residents with comorbidities. CXR was less cost-effective. Cost-effectiveness was sensitive to latent TB infection (LTBI) rate and bacillus Calmette-Guérin vaccination rate. Effective LTBI screening using IGRA is recommended to prevent TB transmission not only in nursing homes but also in local communities in low-incidence countries.

The screening and treatment of latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) to prevent active tuberculosis (TB) is recommended by the WHO in all HIV-infected patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate its implementation within Belgium's HIV care. A multiple-choice questionnaire was sent to 55 physicians working in the country's AIDS reference centres. Response rate reached 62%. Only 20% screened all their HIV-infected patients for LTBI. Screening methods used and their interpretation vary from one physician to another. The main barriers to the implementation of LTBI screening and treatment, as perceived by the participants, are lack of sensitivity of screening tools, risks associated with polypharmacy and toxicity of treatment. The poor coverage of LTBI screening reported here and the inconsistency in methods used raises concern. However, this was not unexpected as, in low-TB incidence countries, who, when and how to screen for LTBI remains unclear and published guidelines show important disparities. Recently, a targeted approach in which only HIV-infected patients at highest risk of TB are screened has been suggested. Such a strategy would limit unnecessary exposure to LTBI treatment. This methodology was approved by 80% of the participants and could therefore achieve greater coverage. Its clinical validation is still pending.

In some French départements, the eradication of bovine tuberculosis is incomplete and usual skin tests [single intradermal tuberculin test (SIT) and single intradermal comparative cervical test (SICCT)] have poor specificity due to cross-reactions with non-pathogenic mycobacteria, causing economic losses. In Côte d'Or (Burgundy, France), an experimental serial testing scheme based on the combination of SICCT and gamma-interferon (IFN-γ) tests has been initiated in order to shorten the interval between suspicion and its invalidation in herds with false-positive results to skin tests. Our aim was to assess the scheme's sensitivity and to compare it to the sensitivity of the screening scheme recommended by the European Commission. Our study included 1768 animals from Côte d'Or. The sensitivities of both schemes were estimated using a Bayesian approach. The individual sensitivity of the IFN-γ test [88·1%, 95% credibility interval (CrI) 72·8–97·5] was not significantly different from individual SICCT sensitivity (80·3%, 95% CrI 61·6–98·0) and individual SIT sensitivity (84·2%, 95% CrI 59·0–98·2). The individual specificity of the IFN-γ test was 62·3% (95% CrI 60·2–64·5). No significant difference could be demonstrated between the sensitivities of the serial testing scheme used in Côte d'Or (73·1%, 95% CrI 41·1–100) and the European Union serial testing scheme (70·1%, 95% CrI 31·5–100·0).

Migrants born in hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) endemic countries are at increased risk of being infected with these viruses. The first symptoms may arise when liver damage has already occurred. The challenge is to identify these infections early, since effective treatment has become available. In 2011 we conducted a screening project in first-generation migrants (FGMs) born in Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, the former Soviet Republics, and Vietnam and living in Arnhem and Rheden. All participants were offered free blood screening for HBV and HCV. In total 959 participants were tested, with the country of origin known for 927, equating to 28·7% of all registered FGMs from the chosen countries. Nineteen percent (n = 176) had serological signs of past or chronic HBV infection and 2·2% (n = 21) had chronic HBV infection. The highest prevalence of chronic HBV infection was found in the Vietnamese population (9·5%, n = 12). Chronic HCV was found in two persons from the former Soviet Republics and one from Vietnam. Twenty-four percent (n = 5) of the newly identified patients with chronic HBV and one of the three patients with chronic HCV received treatment. Three of the patients, two with HCV and one with HBV, already had liver cirrhosis. The highest (9·5%) HBV prevalence was found in FGMs from Vietnam, indicating a high need for focusing on that particular immigrant population in order to identify more people with silent HBV infection. The fact that three patients already had liver cirrhosis underlines the necessity of early identification of HBV and HCV infection in risk groups.

The incidence of active tuberculosis (TB) and latent tuberculosis infection (LTBI) in inmates and prison staff is higher than that in the general population. Mycobacterium tuberculosis-specific interferon-gamma release assays (IGRAs) provide more accurate diagnosis of M. tuberculosis infection with higher specificity than the tuberculin skin test (TST). To assess the cost-effectiveness of QuantiFERON®-TB Gold In-Tube (QFT) compared to TST, TST followed by QFT and chest X-ray, we constructed Markov models using a societal perspective on the lifetime horizon. The main outcome measure of effectiveness was quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained. The incremental cost-effectiveness was compared. The QFT-alone strategy was the most cost-effective for entry TB screening in prisons in developed countries. Cost-effectiveness was not sensitive to the rates of BCG vaccination, LTBI, TB, HIV infection and multidrug-resistant TB. Entry TB screening using an IGRA in prisons should be considered on the basis of its cost-effectiveness by public health intervention.

This study used linked national tuberculosis (TB) and HIV surveillance data to investigate recent trends and factors associated with HIV co-infection (TB-HIV) in healthcare workers (HCWs) with TB in England and Wales. Methods applied were the χ2 trend test and logistic regression. Overall 14% (231/1627) of HCWs with TB were co-infected with HIV, increasing from 8% in 1999 to 14% in 2005 (P<0·001). Most (78%) HCWs were non-UK born and 74% of these developed TB ⩾2 years post-entry. Being born in Sub-Saharan Africa was an independent predictor for TB-HIV, especially for female HCWs (odds ratio 66·5, 95% confidence interval 16·3–271·1), who also had a lower median CD4 count than other co-infected women (106/mm3, interquartile range 40–200, P<0·01). Voluntary HIV testing of new HCWs should be encouraged as an opportunity for early diagnosis. Post-entry, a high index of clinical suspicion for TB in those most at risk remains important.

Despite the increased prevalence of hepatitis B and C in most migrant groups in The Netherlands, a national screening policy for these infections is not available. In order to estimate the prevalence of hepatitis B and C in the largest group of first-generation migrants (FGM) in The Netherlands, we conducted a screening project in the Turkish community of Arnhem. In a separate project we identified patients from the target population with chronic hepatitis B and C from hospital records (1990–2008). Educational meetings concerning hepatitis were organized, with all participants being offered a blood screening test. Participants were tested for hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), antibodies to hepatitis B core antigen (anti-HBc) and antibodies to hepatitis C virus (anti-HCV). In total 709 persons were tested, a complete dataset was available for 647 patients. We found that 3·0% and 0·4% of Turkish FGM aged >24 years in Arnhem had active hepatitis B, defined as HBsAg positive, and tested positive for anti-HCV, respectively. The hospital records revealed another 32 patients, 28 with hepatitis B and four with hepatitis C representing 0·7% for hepatitis B and 0·1% for hepatitis C in relation to the total number of Turkish FGM in Arnhem. We believe that active hepatitis screening of FGM from Turkey should be part of the national health policy as it will benefit the individual and public health.

An unlinked anonymous survey was conducted to measure the prevalence of selected markers for HIV, hepatitis B and C infection in recruits to the UK Armed Forces to inform future screening and hepatitis B vaccination policies. During 2007, nearly 14 000 left-over samples taken from new recruits for blood typing were collected, unlinked from identifiers and anonymously tested for HIV, hepatitis C and current and past cleared hepatitis B infection. Overall, serological evidence of HIV and hepatitis C was found in 0·06% and 0·06% of recruits, respectively. Evidence of past cleared and current hepatitis B infection was found in 3·63% and 0·37% of recruits, respectively. Overall, prevalence rates were broadly consistent with UK population estimates of infection. However, HIV and hepatitis B prevalence was higher in recruits of African origin than in those from the UK (P<0·0001). Screening for these infections is an option that could be considered for those entering Services from high-prevalence countries.