No abstract

Introduction:On 14th August 2015 an office manager informed Public Health England of five employees known to have been diagnosed with pneumonia over the previous three weeks. We investigated to establish whether an outbreak occurred and to identify and control the source of infection.Methods:We undertook case finding for self-reported pneumonia cases at local businesses (July-August 2015). Clinical samples from a hospitalised case were tested for common respiratory pathogens, but returned negative results. Further testing confirmed Chlamydia psittaci infection in this case (serology and PCR).  We subsequently undertook C. psittaci testing for all cases, redefining them as confirmed (C. psittaci PCR or high antibody titre via serology) or probable (inconclusive C. psittaci serology). Twenty-eight day exposure histories informed descriptive epidemiological analysis. We conducted an environmental investigation at the office to identify potential sources of exposure.Results:We identified six office workers with pneumonia; four met case definitions (three confirmed, one probable) with symptom onset between 29th July and 4th August 2015. Workplace was the only epidemiological link and only one case reported limited, indirect bird contact. Environmental investigations identified pigeons roosting near the office which were being fed by workers (none cases).Discussion:This was a probable outbreak of psittacosis with no direct bird-to-human contact reported. Cases recovered after receiving appropriate antibiotics. Feeding of pigeons was stopped. A deep clean of office ventilation systems was conducted and workers were advised to avoid bird contact.  We hypothesised that indirect environmental exposure to infected pigeons was to the source of this outbreak. This work provides evidence that health professionals should consider psittacosis in the differential diagnosis of cases of severe or atypical respiratory illness even without overt bird contact.

Background The recent use of Chemical Weapons (CWs) in armed conflicts and terror attacks highlights the importance of understanding their full impact in order to inform an effective response. This article argues that while the consequences of CWs on individual health have dominated our understanding of the impact of these weapons, far less attention has been directed to their impact on public health. Methods A review of the literature on the health impact of CWs was conducted, and two case studies of their use in urban settings were explored - Halabja in northern Iraq in 1988 and throughout Syria’s ongoing conflict. Results The importance of considering the long-term health consequences of CW use and their impact on healthcare and health systems was demonstrated. Conclusions This article highlights the importance of supporting future research on the topic and proposes a framework for assessing the public health impact of CW use.

No abstract