• 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.

Q Fever among Culling Workers, the Netherlands, 2009?2010

Gert van der Hoek

In Memoriam - Editor, Senior Moderator
Giving personal protection like masks apparently wasn't enough. Vaccination should be considered?


Q Fever among Culling Workers, the Netherlands, 2009?2010

Conclusions

Seroconversion for C. burnetii among 17.5% of culling
workers who were seronegative before culling provides
evidence of high-risk work. Before culling, seroprevalence
was 13%, similar to that among blood donors in a highincidence area in the Netherlands in 2009 (H.L. Zaaijer,
pers. comm.) and in similar high-risk occupational groups
(7). Laboratory testing by using ELISA is an accepted
method in an acute setting (8), and positive results (including
positive IgM only) were confi rmed by immunofl uorescence
assay. Nonparticipants were in the youngest and oldest age
groups; their effect on the proportion of seroconversion is
uncertain. Eighteen workers (excluded for not providing
a follow-up blood sample) completed the questionnaire
in June. Symptom incidence for these 18 workers was the
same as that for included participants.
Symptomatic infection (31% of seroconverters) was
probably underestimated. A diagnosis of Q fever was selfreported (unconfi rmed) to the occupational health service
by 8 workers who did not participate in the study.

During
December?July 2010, the national infectious disease
surveillance system reported 11 culling-related cases of
acute Q fever; 2 of these patients were hospitalized.
A strong association was shown between risk for
seroconversion and total hours worked on the farms and
working inside the stable. In other settings internationally,
a risk gradient has also been shown for close direct and
indirect animal contact over time (9,10). In our study,
half the participants had experience with previous animal
epidemics (avian infl uenza, foot-and-mouth disease,
classical swine fever) and using PPE. Their compliance
with PPE was reportedly high; however, a key problem was
not wearing PPE while taking work breaks but remaining
on the farm.

Given the high risk for infection despite extensive
personal protective measures during culling, additional
preventive measures are needed. The Health Council of the
Netherlands issued guidelines for persons in risk groups
who would benefi t from vaccination against Q fever (11).
Culling workers were not included in these guidelines. The
effi cacy of human Q fever vaccine has been shown to be
high for young and healthy persons in similar occupational
groups (12?14). Vaccination of culling workers could be
considered if further animal culling is advised.

Full article:CDC
 
Back
Top