The current UK National Framework for Pandemic Influenza states that during a pandemic, domestic travel should continue to operate normally but users should adopt good hygiene measures, stagger journeys where possible to reduce overcrowding; and stay at home altogether if symptomatic with pandemic influenza. This advice reflects the need to maintain, as far as possible, business continuity and near normal functioning of society, but acknowledges that some data exist about the transmission of influenza on board public transport, notably commercial airliners. Until very recently, there were no data that directly supported or refuted an association between the use of public ground transportation and the risk of acute respiratory infection. The risk posed by large numbers of transient casual human contacts has not been adequately defined. The current uncertainty makes the formulation of pandemic transport policies difficult. So what’s the risk?
Is public transport a risk factor for acute respiratory infection? BMC Infectious Diseases 2011, 11:16doi:10.1186/1471-2334-11-16
Background: The relationship between public transport use and acquisition of acute respiratory infection (ARI) is not well understood but potentially important during epidemics and pandemics.
Methods: A case-control study performed during the 2008/09 influenza season. Cases (n=72) consulted a General Practitioner with ARI, and controls with another non-respiratory acute condition (n=66). Data were obtained on bus or tram usage in the five days preceding illness onset (cases) or the five days before consultation (controls) alongside demographic details. Multiple logistic regression modelling was used to investigate the association between bus or tram use and ARI, adjusting for potential confounders.
Results: Recent bus or tram use within five days of symptom onset was associated with an almost six-fold increased risk of consulting for ARI (adjusted OR=5.94 95% CI 1.33-26.5). The risk of ARI appeared to be modified according to the degree of habitual bus and tram use, but this was not statistically significant (1-3 times/week: adjusted OR=0.54 (95% CI 0.15-1.95; >3 times/week: 0.37 (95% CI 0.13-1.06).
Conclusions: We found a statistically significant association between ARI and bus or tram use in the five days before symptom onset. The risk appeared greatest among occasional bus or tram users, but this trend was not statistically significant. However, these data are plausible in relation to the greater likelihood of developing protective antibodies to common respiratory viruses if repeatedly exposed. The findings have differing implications for the control of seasonal acute respiratory infections and for pandemic influenza.