title: Non-pharmaceutical public health interventions for pandemic influenza: an evaluation of the evidence base.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  In an influenza pandemic, the benefit of vaccines and antiviral medications will be constrained by limitations on supplies and effectiveness. Non-pharmaceutical public health interventions will therefore be vital in curtailing disease spread. However, the most comprehensive assessments of the literature to date recognize the generally poor quality of evidence on which to base non-pharmaceutical pandemic planning decisions. In light of the need to prepare for a possible pandemic despite concerns about the poor quality of the literature, combining available evidence with expert opinion about the relative merits of non-pharmaceutical interventions for pandemic influenza may lead to a more informed and widely accepted set of recommendations. We evaluated the evidence base for non-pharmaceutical public health interventions. Then, based on the collective evidence, we identified a set of recommendations for and against interventions that are specific to both the setting in which an intervention may be used and the pandemic phase, and which can be used by policymakers to prepare for a pandemic until scientific evidence can definitively respond to planners' needs.
  
  
  METHODS
  Building on reviews of past pandemics and recent historical inquiries, we evaluated the relative merits of non-pharmaceutical interventions by combining available evidence from the literature with qualitative and quantitative expert opinion. Specifically, we reviewed the recent scientific literature regarding the prevention of human-to-human transmission of pandemic influenza, convened a meeting of experts from multiple disciplines, and elicited expert recommendation about the use of non-pharmaceutical public health interventions in a variety of settings (healthcare facilities; community-based institutions; private households) and pandemic phases (no pandemic; no US pandemic; early localized US pandemic; advanced US pandemic).
  
  
  RESULTS
  The literature contained a dearth of evidence on the efficacy or effectiveness of most non-pharmaceutical interventions for influenza. In an effort to inform decision-making in the absence of strong scientific evidence, the experts ultimately endorsed hand hygiene and respiratory etiquette, surveillance and case reporting, and rapid viral diagnosis in all settings and during all pandemic phases. They also encouraged patient and provider use of masks and other personal protective equipment as well as voluntary self-isolation of patients during all pandemic phases. Other non-pharmaceutical interventions including mask-use and other personal protective equipment for the general public, school and workplace closures early in an epidemic, and mandatory travel restrictions were rejected as likely to be ineffective, infeasible, or unacceptable to the public.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The demand for scientific evidence on non-pharmaceutical public health interventions for influenza is pervasive, and present policy recommendations must rely heavily on expert judgment. In the absence of a definitive science base, our assessment of the evidence identified areas for further investigation as well as non-pharmaceutical public health interventions that experts believe are likely to be beneficial, feasible and widely acceptable in an influenza pandemic.
authors: RAND Center for Domestic and International Health Security, 1776 Main Street, Santa Monica, California, USA. Julia_Aledort@rand.org
authors: Julia E
authors: JE
authors: Aledort
authors: Nicole
authors: N
authors: Lurie
authors: Jeffrey
authors: J
authors: Wasserman
authors: Samuel A
authors: SA
authors: Bozzette
mesh_terms: D003140:Communicable Disease Control / Q000379:methods*; D032921:Consensus; D004196:Disease Outbreaks / Q000517:prevention & control*; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine; D006291:Health Policy; D006801:Humans; D007251:Influenza, Human / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000517:prevention & control*; D011635:Public Health Administration
references: Lancet. 1998 Feb 14;351(9101):467-71
references: 9482437
references: JAMA. 2001 Dec 5;286(21):2711-7
references: 11730447
references: Am J Infect Control. 2003 Oct;31(6):364-70
references: 14608304
references: J Pediatr Health Care. 1997 Jan-Feb;11(1):26-31
references: 9052131
references: Emerg Infect Dis. 2001 Mar-Apr;7(2):234-40
references: 11294714
references: Emerg Infect Dis. 2006 Jan;12(1):81-7
references: 16494722
references: Med Decis Making. 2004 Mar-Apr;24(2):228-31
references: 15090107
references: Clin Infect Dis. 2003 Oct 15;37(8):1094-101
references: 14523774
references: Commun Dis Intell. 1997 Nov 27;21(22):333-7
references: 9409066
references: N Engl J Med. 1992 Jul 9;327(2):88-93
references: 1285746
references: N Engl J Med. 2005 Dec 22;353(25):2633-6
references: 16371626
references: Lancet. 2003 May 3;361(9368):1519-20
references: 12737864
references: Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 1999 Mar;20(3):200-2
references: 10100548
references: Am J Nurs. 1989 Jul;89(7):934-9
references: 2735355
references: Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1986 Oct;30(4):542-4
references: 3789690
references: Pediatrics. 1994 Dec;94(6 Pt 2):991-4
references: 7971087
references: Lancet. 2005 Jul 16-22;366(9481):225-33
references: 16023513
references: Pediatrics. 2005 Sep;116(3):587-94
references: 16140697
references: Science. 2006 Nov 10;314(5801):929
references: 17095681
references: Am J Infect Control. 2005 Mar;33(2):67-77
references: 15761405
references: Emerg Infect Dis. 2003 Sep;9(9):1042-5
references: 14519237
references: Am J Infect Control. 1999 Jun;27(3):258-61
references: 10358229
references: Biosecur Bioterror. 2006;4(4):366-75
references: 17238820
references: Am J Infect Control. 2001 Aug;29(4):207-10
references: 11486255
references: Emerg Infect Dis. 2006 Dec;12(12):1961-4
references: 17326953
references: Clin Infect Dis. 2004 Apr 1;38(7):925-31
references: 15034821
references: Emerg Infect Dis. 2006 Jan;12(1):88-94
references: 16494723
references: J Hosp Infect. 1995 Jun;30 Suppl:140-55
references: 7560944
references: Emerg Infect Dis. 2005 Aug;11(8):1303-5
references: 16102326
references: BMJ. 2004 Jun 19;328(7454):1490
references: 15205295
references: JAMA. 2003 Dec 24;290(24):3215-21
references: 14693874
references: J Public Health (Oxf). 2004 Sep;26(3):288-92
references: 15454599
references: Evid Rep Technol Assess (Summ). 2002 Mar;(47):1-11
references: 11979732
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006 Apr 11;103(15):5935-40
references: 16585506
references: Nature. 2005 Sep 8;437(7056):209-14
references: 16079797
references: Epidemiology. 1999 May;10(3):219-27
references: 10230828
references: Int J Nurs Pract. 2004 Feb;10(1):3-9
references: 14764017
references: N Engl J Med. 2005 Sep 29;353(13):1374-85
references: 16192482
references: JAMA. 2006 Apr 12;295(14):1700-4
references: 16609092
references: Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2004 Jul;23(7):675-7
references: 15247610
references: Glob Public Health. 2006;1(2):178-93
references: 19153906