Prevalence of Coxiella burnetii Infections Among North Dakota Sheep Producers

Guo, How‐Ran; Gilmore, Rodney C.; Waag, David M.; Shireley, Larry A.; Freund, Eugene

doi:10.1097/00043764-199811000-00011

Cited by 15 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Because timing of the event coincided with the period when influenza incidence was highest (winter) and because of the protean manifestations of acute Q fever, it was difficult to determine specific illness related to C. burnetii among those few individuals with significant antibodies. The overall seroprevalence (24%) of the ARC workers was within a range previously described (Florida Department of Health 1964, Thibon et al 1996, Guo et al 1998, Valencia et al 2000, Nebreda et al 2001.…”

supporting

confidence: 74%

Pseudoepidemic of Q Fever at an Animal Research Facility

Conti

Belcuore

Nicholson

et al. 2004

Vector-Borne and Zoonotic Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Serum samples from people exposed to sheep at a research facility were evaluated by a commercial laboratory and resulted in an overall Coxiella burnetii seroprevalence of 75%. We interviewed individuals to determine exposure history and compatible illness, and retested their sera. Analysis indicated that the commercial laboratory was misinterpreting its results; when corrected, the seroprevalence dropped to 27%. Test kits of the brand used by the commercial laboratory gave equivalent results to the in-house CDC assay when tested in parallel at CDC. Upon final analysis, only the attending veterinarian was confirmed as a Q fever case. This event resulted in increased risk reduction protocols at the research facility and improved public health communication among health authorities. This pseudoepidemic resulted from a lapse in laboratory quality control for testing. Similar errors can be avoided through standardization and improved review of laboratory procedures.

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 74%

Pseudoepidemic of Q Fever at an Animal Research Facility

Conti

Belcuore

Nicholson

et al. 2004

Vector-Borne and Zoonotic Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Exposures occur in packing plants, dairies, stockyard facilities, and to sheep farmers and ranch hands during the birthing process (27). The incidence of Q fever was found to be higher than expected when surveillance of North Dakota sheep producers was undertaken (28). C. burnetti is a hardy and infectious organism, and aerosolized bacteria can be spread over a half mile, causing community outbreaks.…”

Section: Microorganisms Infectonmentioning

confidence: 94%

Agricultural Lung Diseases

Kirkhorn¹,

Garry²

2000

Environmental Health Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Estimates of disease burden have to be extrapolated from outbreaks, serosurveys and public health diagnostic laboratory data (Maurin and Raoult, ). Insufficient epidemiological data likely lead to underestimation of the global burden of disease compounded by tests with low sensitivity and variable clinical signs in humans (Guo et al., ; Maurin and Raoult, ; Angelakis and Raoult, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effectiveness of Coxiella burnetii Vaccines in Occupationally Exposed Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

O’Neill

Sargeant

Poljak

2013

Zoonoses and Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To estimate the effect of vaccination in preventing acute Q fever in individuals occupationally exposed to Coxiella burnetii, a systematic review and meta-analysis were undertaken in controlled trials and observational studies. Publications were obtained through a scoping study of English and non-English articles, and those reporting a commercially licensed or licensable vaccine compared with an unvaccinated or placebo control group were included in the review. Two authors performed independent assessment of risk of systematic error and data extraction. One controlled trial and five cohort publications met the inclusion criteria. All trials used a Henzerling phase I vaccine. A random-effects meta-analysis estimated significant protection in abattoir workers (RR = 0.07; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.02-0.22) compared with the control individuals. In individuals with rare or sporadic contact with the abattoir, a significant benefit of vaccination was also found (RR = 0.06; 95% CI 0-0.93). Overall, the vaccine effectively prevented acute Q fever in individuals responsible for handling animals or their products and those working in the abattoir but not directly exposed to animals (RR = 0.06; 95% CI 0.02-0.18). Caution must be taken when interpreting the effect of C. burnetii vaccination as significant heterogeneity amongst publications was observed. A meta-regression found no significant univariate associations. This may reflect the uncertainty provided by reported data in the cohort publications. Potential systematic biases were present in the publications, and evidence included may not be sufficiently robust to extrapolate the effect of vaccination on occupationally exposed groups beyond the population of abattoir employees in Australia where all included studies occurred.

show abstract

Prevalence of Coxiella burnetii Infections Among North Dakota Sheep Producers

Cited by 15 publications

References 37 publications

Pseudoepidemic of Q Fever at an Animal Research Facility

Pseudoepidemic of Q Fever at an Animal Research Facility

Agricultural Lung Diseases

The Effectiveness of Coxiella burnetii Vaccines in Occupationally Exposed Populations: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About