死或活:埃博拉出血热在人类中爆发期间的动物抽样。

Emerging health threats journal Pub Date : 2012-01-01 Epub Date: 2012-04-30 DOI:10.3402/ehtj.v5i0.9134
Sarah H Olson, Patricia Reed, Kenneth N Cameron, Benard J Ssebide, Christine K Johnson, Stephen S Morse, William B Karesh, Jonna A K Mazet, Damien O Joly
{"title":"死或活:埃博拉出血热在人类中爆发期间的动物抽样。","authors":"Sarah H Olson,&nbsp;Patricia Reed,&nbsp;Kenneth N Cameron,&nbsp;Benard J Ssebide,&nbsp;Christine K Johnson,&nbsp;Stephen S Morse,&nbsp;William B Karesh,&nbsp;Jonna A K Mazet,&nbsp;Damien O Joly","doi":"10.3402/ehtj.v5i0.9134","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There are currently no widely accepted animal surveillance guidelines for human Ebola hemorrhagic fever (EHF) outbreak investigations to identify potential sources of Ebolavirus (EBOV) spillover into humans and other animals. Animal field surveillance during and following an outbreak has several purposes, from helping identify the specific animal source of a human case to guiding control activities by describing the spatial and temporal distribution of wild circulating EBOV, informing public health efforts, and contributing to broader EHF research questions. Since 1976, researchers have sampled over 10,000 individual vertebrates from areas associated with human EHF outbreaks and tested for EBOV or antibodies. Using field surveillance data associated with EHF outbreaks, this review provides guidance on animal sampling for resource-limited outbreak situations, target species, and in some cases which diagnostics should be prioritized to rapidly assess the presence of EBOV in animal reservoirs. In brief, EBOV detection was 32.7% (18/55) for carcasses (animals found dead) and 0.2% (13/5309) for live captured animals. Our review indicates that for the purposes of identifying potential sources of transmission from animals to humans and isolating suspected virus in an animal in outbreak situations, (1) surveillance of free-ranging non-human primate mortality and morbidity should be a priority, (2) any wildlife morbidity or mortality events should be investigated and may hold the most promise for locating virus or viral genome sequences, (3) surveillance of some bat species is worthwhile to isolate and detect evidence of exposure, and (4) morbidity, mortality, and serology studies of domestic animals should prioritize dogs and pigs and include testing for virus and previous exposure.</p>","PeriodicalId":72898,"journal":{"name":"Emerging health threats journal","volume":"5 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3402/ehtj.v5i0.9134","citationCount":"59","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dead or alive: animal sampling during Ebola hemorrhagic fever outbreaks in humans.\",\"authors\":\"Sarah H Olson,&nbsp;Patricia Reed,&nbsp;Kenneth N Cameron,&nbsp;Benard J Ssebide,&nbsp;Christine K Johnson,&nbsp;Stephen S Morse,&nbsp;William B Karesh,&nbsp;Jonna A K Mazet,&nbsp;Damien O Joly\",\"doi\":\"10.3402/ehtj.v5i0.9134\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>There are currently no widely accepted animal surveillance guidelines for human Ebola hemorrhagic fever (EHF) outbreak investigations to identify potential sources of Ebolavirus (EBOV) spillover into humans and other animals. Animal field surveillance during and following an outbreak has several purposes, from helping identify the specific animal source of a human case to guiding control activities by describing the spatial and temporal distribution of wild circulating EBOV, informing public health efforts, and contributing to broader EHF research questions. Since 1976, researchers have sampled over 10,000 individual vertebrates from areas associated with human EHF outbreaks and tested for EBOV or antibodies. Using field surveillance data associated with EHF outbreaks, this review provides guidance on animal sampling for resource-limited outbreak situations, target species, and in some cases which diagnostics should be prioritized to rapidly assess the presence of EBOV in animal reservoirs. In brief, EBOV detection was 32.7% (18/55) for carcasses (animals found dead) and 0.2% (13/5309) for live captured animals. Our review indicates that for the purposes of identifying potential sources of transmission from animals to humans and isolating suspected virus in an animal in outbreak situations, (1) surveillance of free-ranging non-human primate mortality and morbidity should be a priority, (2) any wildlife morbidity or mortality events should be investigated and may hold the most promise for locating virus or viral genome sequences, (3) surveillance of some bat species is worthwhile to isolate and detect evidence of exposure, and (4) morbidity, mortality, and serology studies of domestic animals should prioritize dogs and pigs and include testing for virus and previous exposure.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72898,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Emerging health threats journal\",\"volume\":\"5 \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3402/ehtj.v5i0.9134\",\"citationCount\":\"59\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Emerging health threats journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3402/ehtj.v5i0.9134\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2012/4/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Emerging health threats journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3402/ehtj.v5i0.9134","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2012/4/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 59

摘要

目前尚无广泛接受的用于调查人类埃博拉出血热疫情的动物监测指南,以确定埃博拉病毒(EBOV)向人类和其他动物扩散的潜在来源。疫情期间和之后的动物现场监测有几个目的,从帮助确定人类病例的特定动物来源,到通过描述野生传播的EBOV的空间和时间分布来指导控制活动,为公共卫生工作提供信息,并有助于解决更广泛的EHF研究问题。自1976年以来,研究人员从与人类EHF暴发有关的地区取样了1万多只脊椎动物,并检测了EBOV或抗体。利用与EHF暴发相关的现场监测数据,本综述为资源有限的暴发情况、目标物种以及在某些情况下应优先进行诊断以快速评估动物宿主中是否存在EBOV提供了指导。总之,EBOV在尸体(发现死亡的动物)中检出率为32.7%(18/55),在活的捕获动物中检出率为0.2%(13/5309)。我们的综述表明,为了确定从动物到人类的潜在传播源并在爆发情况下从动物中分离可疑病毒,(1)应优先监测自由放养的非人灵长类动物的死亡率和发病率,(2)应调查任何野生动物的发病率或死亡率事件,这可能最有希望定位病毒或病毒基因组序列。(3)对一些蝙蝠物种的监测是有价值的,可以隔离和发现暴露的证据;(4)家畜的发病率、死亡率和血清学研究应优先考虑狗和猪,并包括病毒和以前暴露的检测。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Dead or alive: animal sampling during Ebola hemorrhagic fever outbreaks in humans.

There are currently no widely accepted animal surveillance guidelines for human Ebola hemorrhagic fever (EHF) outbreak investigations to identify potential sources of Ebolavirus (EBOV) spillover into humans and other animals. Animal field surveillance during and following an outbreak has several purposes, from helping identify the specific animal source of a human case to guiding control activities by describing the spatial and temporal distribution of wild circulating EBOV, informing public health efforts, and contributing to broader EHF research questions. Since 1976, researchers have sampled over 10,000 individual vertebrates from areas associated with human EHF outbreaks and tested for EBOV or antibodies. Using field surveillance data associated with EHF outbreaks, this review provides guidance on animal sampling for resource-limited outbreak situations, target species, and in some cases which diagnostics should be prioritized to rapidly assess the presence of EBOV in animal reservoirs. In brief, EBOV detection was 32.7% (18/55) for carcasses (animals found dead) and 0.2% (13/5309) for live captured animals. Our review indicates that for the purposes of identifying potential sources of transmission from animals to humans and isolating suspected virus in an animal in outbreak situations, (1) surveillance of free-ranging non-human primate mortality and morbidity should be a priority, (2) any wildlife morbidity or mortality events should be investigated and may hold the most promise for locating virus or viral genome sequences, (3) surveillance of some bat species is worthwhile to isolate and detect evidence of exposure, and (4) morbidity, mortality, and serology studies of domestic animals should prioritize dogs and pigs and include testing for virus and previous exposure.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Natural World Individuals and Society Hospital preparedness in community measles outbreaks-challenges and recommendations for low-resource settings. Detection of blaIMP4 and blaNDM1 harboring Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates in a university hospital in Malaysia. Two vicious circles contributing to a diagnostic delay for tuberculosis patients in Arkhangelsk.
×
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:481959085
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