NIOSH alert: protecting poultry workers from avian influenza (bird flu) (superseded by 2008-128).

2008 ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 123 (3) ◽  
pp. 316-322 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathleen L. MacMahon ◽  
Lisa J. Delaney ◽  
Greg Kullman ◽  
John D. Gibbins ◽  
John Decker ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 60-65
Author(s):  
Sheikh Shahidul Islam ◽  
Md Fashiur Rahman ◽  
Md Abu Sayeed Sarker ◽  
Masuda Begum ◽  
SM Humayun Kabir ◽  
...  

Introduction: Avian influenza is considered as serious global public health problem for poultry industry. Literature suggests that when HPAI/H5N1 Avian influenza (AI) outbreaks, humans are prone to increased risk of transmission. The recent pandemic caused by highly pathogenic AIA (H5N1) in domestic poultry is currently rated phase-3 by the World Health Organization on the pandemic alert scale. Every year 244 species of migratory birds visit Bangladesh in the winter season (October-March) of which approximately 21 species may carry the H5N1 or HPAI (Highly Pathogenic Avian influenza) virus. Objective: To assess socio demographic status and knowledge on mode of transmission of avian influenza among the poultry workers of selected poultry farms in Dhaka city. Materials and Methods: This was a cross-sectional study carried out among the poultry workers of selected poultry farms in Dhaka city. The study was conducted over a period of six months from January 2008 to June 2008. A total of 150 poultry workers aged 9 years and above irrespective of sexes were interviewed face to face by using semi-structured questionnaire. Results: Majority of the respondents were male (92%) and nearly 78% of the respondents had educational level from Class-V to SSC. About three fourth of the respondents (68%) mentioned that avian influenza was transmitted by direct contact. Eighty percent (80%) of the respondents had the knowledge on transmission from poultry to human whereas 63% had the knowledge on transmission from human to human. Good, fair and poor knowledge on mode of transmission of avian influenza was found in 21.33%, 42.67% and 36% of the subjects respectively. Among the respondents belonging to <3 years and 3-5 years duration of service, 12% and 13.33% had poor knowledge followed by 14% and 9.33% had fair knowledge whereas 4% and 4.67% had good knowledge. Conclusion: From the study it was revealed that one third of the workers had poor knowledge on mode of transmission of avian influenza. The study also found that the level of knowledge was found to be good among the older age group having higher educational level and longer duration of service. Journal of Armed Forces Medical College Bangladesh Vol.12(2) 2016: 60-65


Author(s):  
Arief Gilang Ramadhan ◽  
Teguh Susyanto ◽  
Iwan Ady Prabowo

Ducks are widely farmed poultry animals, because of its large population, the disease is also caused a lot. In avian influenza disease is an infectious animal disease caused by a virus and can infect humans. Avian invluenza is also a cause of decreased quality of meat and eggs, can even cause death in ducks. Disease in ducks is difficult to know because people have no prior experience. Communities and breeders find it difficult to take appropriate action on ducks affected by avian influenza so that they can be fatal. During 2012 - 2017 there were 1856 cases of bird flu in Indonesia. In October 2017 there were 3 cases of avian invluenza. Where 900 ducks died. From the explanation above, an expert system is needed to diagnose avian influenza. This system can help ordinary people and farmers who do not have experience in dealing with avian influenza. Disease data and symptoms of avian influenza that will be entered into this expert system can be obtained from interviews with experts and see references of knowledge about duck symptoms. So that this expert system can help in dealing with AI disease. In testing the validity, the calculation of the system manually and from expert diagnosis are the same. So that this application is feasible to use for the community and breeders.


2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xin Wang ◽  
Shisong Fang

ObjectiveTo determine avian influenza A(H5N6) virus infection in humanand environment using extensive surveillances. To evaluate theprevalence of H5N6 infection among high risk population.IntroductionSince the emergence of avian influenza A(H7N9) virus in 2013,extensive surveillances have been established to monitor the humaninfection and environmental contamination with avian influenza virusin southern China. At the end of 2015, human infection with influenzaA(H5N6) virus was identified in Shenzhen for the first time throughthese surveillances. These surveillances include severe pneumoniascreening, influenza like illness (ILI) surveillance, follow-up onclose contact of the confirmed case, serological survey among poultryworkers, environment surveillance in poultry market.MethodsSevere pneumonia screening was carried out in all hospitals ofShenzhen. When a patient with severe pneumonia is suspected forinfection with avian influenza virus, after consultation with at leasttwo senior respiratory physicians from the designated expert paneland gaining their approval, the patient will be reported to local CDC,nasal and pharyngeal swabs will be collected and sent for detectionof H5N6 virus by RT-PCR.ILI surveillance was conducted in 11 sentinel hospitals, 5-20 ILIcases were sampled for detection of seasonal influenza virus by RT-PCR test every week for one sentinel. If swab sample is tested positivefor influenza type A and negative for subtypes of seasonal A(H3N2)and A(H1N1), it will be detected further for influenza A(H5N6) virus.Follow-up on close contacts was immediately carried out whenhuman case of infection with H5N6 was identified. All of closecontacts were requested to report any signs and symptoms of acuterespiratory illness for 10 days, nasal and pharyngeal swabs werecollected and tested for influenza A(H5N6) virus by RT-PCR test.In the meantime, environmental samples were collected in the marketwhich was epidemiologically associated with patient and tested forH5N6 virus by RT-PCR test.Serological survey among poultry workers was conducted in tendistricts of Shenzhen. Poultry workers were recruited in poultrymarkets and screened for any signs and symptoms of acute respiratoryillness, blood samples were collected to detect haemagglutination-inhibition (HI) antibody for influenza A(H5N6) virus.Environment surveillance was conducted twice a month in tendistricts of Shenzhen. For each district, 10 swab samples werecollected at a time. All environmental samples were tested forinfluenza A(H5N6) virus by RT-PCR test.ResultsFrom Nov 1, 2015 to May 31, 2016, 50 patients with severepneumonia were reported and detected for H5N6 virus, three patientswere confirmed to be infected with H5N6 virus. Case 1 was a 26 yearsold woman and identified on Dec 29, 2015. She purchased a duck ata live poultry stall of nearby market, cooked and ate the duck 4 daysbefore symptom onset. After admission to hospital on Dec 27, hercondition deteriorated rapidly, on Dec 30 she died. The case 2 was a25 years old man and confirmed on Jan 7, 2016. He visited a marketeveryday and had no close contact with poultry, except for passingby live poultry stalls. He recovered and was discharged from hospitalon Jan 22. The case 3 was is a 31 years old woman and reported onJan 16, 2016, she had no contact with live poultry and died on Feb 8.For 60 close contacts of three cases, none of them reported signsor symptoms of acute respiratory illness, all of nasal and pharyngealswabs were tested negative for influenza A(H5N6) virus by RT-PCRtest. Of 146 environmental swabs collected in the case’s living placesand relevant poultry markets, 38 were tested positive for influenzaA(H5N6) virus by RT-PCR test.From Nov 1, 2015 to May 31, 2016, 2812 ILI cases were sampledand tested for influenza type A and subtypes of seasonal influenza.Those samples tested positive for influenza type A could be furthersubtyped to seasonal A(H3N2) or A(H1N1), therefore no sample fromILI case was tested for influenza A(H5N6) virus.Serological surveys among poultry workers were conductedtwice, for the first survey 186 poultry workers were recruited in Oct2015, for the second survey 195 poultry workers were recruited inJan 2016. Blood sample were collected and tested for HI antibodyof influenza A(H5N6) virus. 2 individuals had H5N6 HI antibodytiter of 1:40, 5 individuals had H5N6 HI antibody titer of 1:20, rest ofthem had H5N6 HI antibody titer of <1:20. According to the WHOguideline, HI antibody titer of≥1:160 against avian influenza viruswere considered positive.From Nov 1, 2015 to May 31, 2016, of 1234 environmental swabscollected in poultry markets, 339 (27.5%)were tested positive forinfluenza A(H5N6) virus by RT-PCR test. Each of the ten districtshad poultry markets which was contaminated by influenza A(H5N6)virus.ConclusionsIn 2015-2016 winter, three cases of infection with influenzaA(H5N6) virus were identified in Shenzhen, all of them were youngindividuals with average age of 27.3 years and developed severepneumonia soon after illness onset, two cases died. For acute andsevere disease, early detection and treatment is the key measure forpatient’s prognosis.H5N6 virus was identified in poultry market and other placeswhere patient appeared, implying poultry market probably was thesource of infection. Despite the high contamination rate of H5N6virus in poultry market, we found that the infection with H5N6 virusamong poultry workers was not prevalent, with infection rate being0/381. Human infection with H5N6 virus seemed to be a sporadicoccurrence, poultry-human transmission of H5N6 virus might not bevery effective.


Author(s):  
Maryna Sapachova

ObjectiveThe performance of comparative analysis of sensitivity and resultsof detection of avian influenza virus by real time polymerase chainreaction (PCR-RT) and loop-mediated isothermal amplification of thenucleic acids (LAMP) was the main goal of the study.IntroductionAs part of this surveillance study for Avian Influenza both activeand passive surveillance samples were tested using PCR and alsoutilized to validate the LAMP method. Active surveillance samplesinclude pathological material and tracheal and cloacal swabs fromill poultry, which were subsequently assessed for avian influenzaduring diagnosis, and birds collected by hunters. Passive surveillanceincluded environmental samples such as sand and bird faeces.Active surveillance samples were taken mostly from poultry farmsacross Ukraine, where infected birds are required to be diagnosedby State Scientific Research Institute of Laboratory Diagnosticsand Veterinary Sanitary Expertise (SSRILDVSE) by Ukraine Law.Passive surveillance samples were taken primarily during the annualbird migration season. Development of simple, sensitive, and cheapmethods for diagnostics of avian influenza is a very important taskfor practical veterinary medicine. LAMP is one of such methods.The technique is based on isothermal amplification of nucleic acids.It does not require special conditions and equipment (PCR cyclers),therefore it is cheaper in comparison with PCR. Accurate diagnosisis necessary for determining the risk associated with avian influenzain Ukraine and along the Dnipro River during the migratory season.MethodsFor the research, we used PCR-RT commercial kit Bird-Flu-PCR(Ukrzoovetprompostach, Ukraine), LAMP (the protocol has beenoptimized and patented by SSRILDVSE), QIAamp®Viral RNA MiniKit. For the study, we used pathological and biological materials frombirds, which were sent to the SSRILDVSE from all regions of Ukraineaccording to the 2013–2014 State monitoring plan.Set up of the real time PCR reactions and parameters ofamplifications are indicated in the instruction to the kit.The following protocol was used to set up the RT- LAMP: 2.5μL10 X Thermopol buffer, 1 mmol/L betaine, 5 mmol/L MgSO4,1.4 mmol/L - BNTP, 12.5μmol/L SYBR GREEN, 0.5 mmol/LMnCL2, up to 25μL Nuclease-free water, 8 U Bsm DNA polymerase,0.1μM/1 of F3, 0.1μM/1 of B3, 0.8μM/1 of FIP, 0.8μM/1 of BIP,0.4μM/1 of LF, 0.4 of LB, 2μL cDNA.During our work, we used the following optimal temperature andtime for the amplification – 59°C and 60 minutes.The sensitivity of diagnostic kit Bird-Flu-PCR and RT- LAMP wasdetermined by testing cDNA of the reference strain of AIV H5N1,which was provided to us by NSC Institute for Experimental andClinical Veterinary Medicine (Kharkiv, Ukraine). For the standard,we employed concentration in the range of 10.0-0.01 ng/sample.ResultsTable 1.This table shows the reproducibility results obtained by bothmethods. However, taken into account absence of highly pathogenicavian influenza virus circulating in Ukraine during the studied period,it was not possible to confirm these results with protocols of positivesamples.Table 2.It has been established that the sensitivity of PCR-RT kit Bird-Flu-PCR is 0.01 ng/sample for gene M and 0.1 ng/sample for subtypeH5N1.Fig. 1. Visual detection of LAMP products with differentconcentrations of cDNA of avian influenza virus (ng per sample):1 – 10; 2 – 5; 3 – 1.0; 4 – 0.1; 5–7 – 0.01; 8–9 – 0.1; 10 – negative.We have examined the LAMP results using electrophoresis forthe confirmation of visual detection and correct interpretation of theresults (Fig. 2).Fig.2. Electrophoresis results for LAMP products. M –molecular weight marker; 1 – 10.0; 2 – 5.0; 3 – 1.0; 4 – 0.1; 5–7– 0.01; 8 - negative control.It has been established that the sensitivity of LAMP is0.1 ng/sample. Slightly lower sensitivity of LAMP in comparisonto PCR-RT can be explained by visual detection of the products ofthe LAMP reaction.Conclusions1. Sensitivity of both methods is high.2. LAMP is a perspective screening method for the diagnosis ofviral infectious diseases supported by confirmation of positive resultsby PCR-RT.


Science ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 309 (5733) ◽  
pp. 364b-364b ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Normile
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document