A Psittacosis Outbreak among English Office Workers with Little or No Contact with Birds, August 2015.

John Mair-Jenkins, Tracey Lamming, Andy Dziadosz, Daniel Flecknoe, Thomas Stubington, Massimo Mentasti, Peter Muir, Philip Monk
{"title":"A Psittacosis Outbreak among English Office Workers with Little or No Contact with Birds, August 2015.","authors":"John Mair-Jenkins,&nbsp;Tracey Lamming,&nbsp;Andy Dziadosz,&nbsp;Daniel Flecknoe,&nbsp;Thomas Stubington,&nbsp;Massimo Mentasti,&nbsp;Peter Muir,&nbsp;Philip Monk","doi":"10.1371/currents.outbreaks.b646c3bb2b4f0e3397183f31823bbca6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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 <i>Chlamydia psittaci</i> infection in this case (serology and PCR).  We subsequently undertook <i>C. psittaci</i> testing for all cases, redefining them as confirmed (<i>C. psittaci</i> PCR or high antibody titre via serology) or probable (inconclusive <i>C. psittaci</i> serology). Twenty-eight day exposure histories informed descriptive epidemiological analysis. We conducted an environmental investigation at the office to identify potential sources of exposure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>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).</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":74464,"journal":{"name":"PLoS currents","volume":"10 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5951689/pdf/","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS currents","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/currents.outbreaks.b646c3bb2b4f0e3397183f31823bbca6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

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.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
2015年8月,英国办公室工作人员与鸟类接触较少或没有接触的鹦鹉热爆发。
2015年8月14日,一名办公室经理向英国公共卫生部通报,在过去三周内已知有五名员工被诊断出患有肺炎。我们进行了调查,以确定是否发生了疫情,并确定和控制感染源。方法:对2015年7 - 8月本地商户自报肺炎病例进行病例查找。对一名住院病例的临床样本进行了常见呼吸道病原体检测,但结果为阴性。进一步检测证实该病例感染鹦鹉热衣原体(血清学和PCR)。随后,我们对所有病例进行了鹦鹉热检测,将其重新定义为确诊(鹦鹉热PCR或血清学高抗体滴度)或可能(不确定的鹦鹉热血清学)。28天暴露史为描述性流行病学分析提供了信息。我们在办公室进行了环境调查,以确定潜在的暴露源。结果:我们确定了6名办公室工作人员患有肺炎;4例符合病例定义(3例确诊,1例可能),于2015年7月29日至8月4日期间出现症状。工作场所是唯一的流行病学联系,仅报告了一例有限的间接禽类接触。环境调查发现办公室附近有鸽子栖息,由工作人员喂食(无个案)。讨论:这是一次可能的鹦鹉热暴发,没有鸟与人直接接触的报告。病例在接受适当抗生素治疗后痊愈。停止喂鸽子。本署已彻底清洁办公室通风系统,并建议员工避免接触雀鸟。我们假设间接暴露于受感染鸽子的环境是这次暴发的根源。这项工作提供的证据表明,卫生专业人员应考虑鹦鹉热病例的严重或非典型呼吸道疾病的鉴别诊断,即使没有明显的鸟类接触。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Estimation of Pneumonic Plague Transmission in Madagascar, August-November 2017. Uganda at Glance of 5.7 Magnitude Earthquake: Lessons for Earthquake Risk Reduction. Does the Humanitarian Sector Use Evidence-informed Standards? A Review of the 2011 Sphere Indicators for Wash, Food Security and Nutrition, and Health Action. Drought in the Semiarid Region of Brazil: Exposure, Vulnerabilities and Health Impacts from the Perspectives of Local Actors. Neurodevelopmental Needs in Young Boys with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD): Observations from the Cooperative International Neuromuscular Research Group (CINRG) DMD Natural History Study (DNHS).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1