• 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.

Incidence of contamination of live bird markets in Bangladesh with influenza A virus and subtypes H5, H7 and H9

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Transbound Emerg Dis. 2017 Dec 10. doi: 10.1111/tbed.12788. [Epub ahead of print]
[h=1]Incidence of contamination of live bird markets in Bangladesh with influenza A virus and subtypes H5, H7 and H9.[/h] Biswas PK[SUP]1[/SUP], Giasuddin M[SUP]2[/SUP], Chowdhury P[SUP]3[/SUP], Barua H[SUP]1[/SUP], Debnath NC[SUP]1,[/SUP][SUP]4[/SUP], Yamage M[SUP]4[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h]

[h=3]Abstract[/h] In the absence of robust active surveillance of avian influenza viruses (AIV) affecting poultry in South Asian countries, monitoring of live bird markets (LBMs) can be an alternative. In a longitudinal study of 32 LBM, five environments were sampled as follows: market floor, stall floor, slaughter area, poultry holding cage and water used for meat processing. Samples were taken monthly for 5 months, September 2013-January 2014. Incidence rates (IRs) of LBM contamination with AIV and its subtypes H5, H7 and H9 were assessed. In 10 of the LBM selected, biosecurity measures had been implemented through FAO interventions: the other 22 were non-intervened. Standard procedures were applied to detect AIV and three subtypes in pooled samples (1:5). An LBM was considered positive for AIV or a subtype if at least one of the pooled samples tested positive. The incidence rates of LBM contamination with AIV, H5, H7 and H9 were 0.194 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.136-0.276), 0.031 (95% CI 0.013-0.075), 0 and 0.175 (95% CI 0.12-0.253) per LBM-month at risk, respectively. The log IR ratio between the FAO-intervened and non-intervened LBM for contamination with AIV was -0.329 (95% CI -1.052 to -0.394, p = .372), 0.598 (95% CI -1.593 to 2.789, p = .593) with subtype H5 and -0.500 (95% CI -1.249 to 0.248, p = .190) with subtype H9, indicating no significant difference. The results obtained suggest that both H5 and H9 were circulating in LBM in Bangladesh in the second half of 2013. The incidence of contamination with H9 was much higher than with H5.


[h=4]KEYWORDS:[/h] avian influenza virus; incidence; live bird market; zoonosis

PMID: 29226568 DOI: 10.1111/tbed.12788
 
Back
Top Bottom