• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Household transmission of pandemic 2009 influenza A (H1N1) virus in Osaka, Japan in May 2009

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
J Infect. 2010 Jul 26. [Epub ahead of print]
Household transmission of pandemic 2009 influenza A (H1N1) virus in Osaka, Japan in May 2009.

Komiya N, Gu Y, Kamiya H, Yahata Y, Yasui Y, Taniguchi K, Okabe N.

Field Epidemiology Training Program, National Institute of Infectious Diseases (NIID), 1-23-1 Toyama, Shinjyuku-ku, Tokyo 162-8640, Japan.
Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess household transmission of pandemic influenza A (H1N1) and effectiveness of postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) of antiviral drugs among household contacts of patients during the first pandemic influenza A (H1N1) outbreak in Osaka, Japan in May 2009. METHODS: Active surveillance of patients and their families was conducted. PublicHealth Center staff visited each home with an infected patient and advised every household member with regard to precautionary measures, and PEP was provided to household contacts to prevent secondary infection. We analyzed the effectiveness of PEP and characteristics of secondary infection. RESULTS: The secondary attack rate (SAR) among household contacts was 3.7%. The SAR among household contacts without PEP was 26.1%. However, the SAR among those with PEP was 0.6%. Only two of 331 household contacts with PEP became infected. One of the two was infected with an oseltamivir-resistant strain. Analysis of SAR by age group showed that those under 20 years of age were at higher risk than those over 20 (relative risk [RR] = 7.9; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.24-27.8). Significant differences with respect to sex, number of household contacts, and use of antiviral medications in the index cases were not observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our present results indicate that PEP is effective for preventing secondary H1N1 infection among household contacts. Copyright ? 2010 The British Infection Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

PMID: 20670650 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20670650
 
Back
Top